Cableware Pty Ltd v Vass Electrical Industries Pty Ltd

official notice

decision of a delegate of the commissioner of patents

Application : No. 598576 in the name of CABLEWARE PTY LTD.

Title: BUS SYSTEM

Action: Opposition under section 59 (Patents Act 1952) by VASS ELECTRICAL INDUSTRIES PTY LTD. Final decision.

Decision: Issued . Application as amended to proceed to sealing.

patents act 1990

decision of a delegate of the commissioner of patents

Re:Patent Application No. 598576 by by CABLEWARE PTY LTD and opposition thereto under section 59 of the Patents Act 1952 by VASS ELECTRICAL INDUSTRIES PTY LTD.

background

In his decision dated 13 August 1992, the delegate found that the opposition failed on all grounds, except for a section 40 defect in claim 8.

Within the time the delegate allowed, an amendment was proposed to delete this claim. This proposed amendment was advertised and has now been allowed. There are no objections consequential to this amendment.

The parties did not wish to be further heard.

DECISION

There being no grounds of objection remaining, I direct that the application proceed to sealing.

R G Tolhurst
Delegate of the Commissioner of Patents

Patent attorneys for the applicant : Davies Collison Cave, Sydney.
Patent attorneys for the opponent : Watermark Patent & Trademark Attorneys, Melbourne.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the decision of a delegate of the Commissioner of Patents concerning Patent Application No. 598576 by Cableware Pty Ltd, an opposition was lodged by Vass Electrical Industries Pty Ltd under section 59 of the Patents Act 1952. The application, titled "BUS SYSTEM," was subjected to opposition by Vass, which was subsequently reviewed by a delegate of the Commissioner of Patents. The dispute centred on the validity and scope of the patent application as claimed by Cableware, with Vass arguing against the patentability of certain claims.

The primary legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the patent application met the criteria for patentability under the Patents Act 1952 and whether the opposition raised by Vass was valid. Specifically, the court needed to assess if the claims in the application were novel, involved an inventive step, and were not obvious in light of prior art. Additionally, the court had to determine if the opposition was justified and whether the defects identified could be rectified by the applicant.

The delegate found that the opposition failed on all grounds, except for a section 40 defect in claim 8. After allowing a time frame for amendment, Cableware proposed an amendment to delete the defective claim, which was subsequently advertised and allowed. No further objections were raised by Vass or any other party following the amendment. Given the absence of remaining grounds for objection, the delegate directed that the patent application proceed to sealing.

As a result of this decision, the delegate of the Commissioner of Patents confirmed that the application, as amended, could proceed to sealing, thereby allowing Cableware to obtain the patent for its "BUS SYSTEM" under the amended claims. The delegate's decision effectively resolved the opposition and cleared the path for the sealing of the patent, as there were no further objections from any party involved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established