Nufarm Australia Ltd. v Monsanto Technology LLC
[2013] APO 66
Citation 1
(Para 23)
…10. However, as discussed by the Deputy Commissioner (Philip Spann) in Micromass Ltd v Varian Inc [2002] APO 31 (at [23]-[30]), these amendments have not introduced a new evidentiary test. There are only two standards of proof recognised under Australian law – the criminal and the civil standards of proof ( Murr…
Emperor Sports Pty. Limited
[2004] APO 26
Citation 2
(Para 21)
…In addition, in focussing on the standard of proof required, I am guided by Micromass v Varian [2002] APO 31. Here the Hearing Officer in addressing this issue stated at a para 27: “…There would appear to be only two standards of proof recognised under Australian law ( Murray v Murray (1960) ALJR 521, Briginshaw…
Machinery Developments Limited v Sealed Air Corporation
[2003] APO 22
Citation 3
(Para 20)
…ed in an opposition proceedings was recently expressed by a delegate of the Commissioner in the Patent Office decision Micromass Limited v Varian Inc [2002] APO 31 (4 September 2002) as that I should be "clearly satisfied that the patent if granted would not be valid".…
New Clear Water Pty Ltd v Atlantis Corporation Pty Ltd
[2003] APO 9
Citation 4
(Para 1)
…h the effect that I should be "clearly satisfied that the patent if granted would not be valid" (see the discussion in Micromass Limited v Varian Inc [2002] APO 31). The opponent in this case has not bothered to provide me with a translation of the French or other foreign language patent specifications it provid…