Patent & Trade Mark
Attorneys
We are
Experts in Navigating IP in the Asia Pacific Region
Thanks to many years of global experience, FB Rice has a network of trusted advisors in all key jurisdictions. We turn to those advisors when assisting our clients to promote their interests.

For specific information on our Asia Pacific capability, click here.

 

 
One door to South East Asia
For a seamless service for filing and prosecuting patent and trade mark applications in South East Asia, click here.

 

Charles Berman

Partner

Charles Berman
“With the resources sector becoming increasingly competitive, intellectual property protection assumes an ever more important role as a business tool. While FB Rice considers innovation as crucial in the resources sector, the benefit of such innovation is lost if an effective strategy for its protection is not also implemented as an integral part of a business's commercial strategy. Such protection is the safest mechanism for maintaining a competitive advantage.”
“With the resources sector becoming increasingly competitive, intellectual property protection assumes an ever more important role as a business tool. While FB Rice considers innovation as crucial in the resources sector, the benefit of such innovation is lost if an effective strategy for its protection is not also implemented as an integral part of a business's commercial strategy. Such protection is the safest mechanism for maintaining a competitive advantage.”
Inventorship – a muddy concept at best
Inventorship has been described as “one of muddiest concepts in the muddy metaphysics of the patent law.” Mueller Brass Co. v. Reading Industries, Inc., 352 F.Supp. 1357, 1372 (E.D.Pa. 1972). Determining inventorship is a complex issue that is undertaken on a much stricter basis than authorship of a scientific publication. It can also be a particularly contentious issue when people are not named as inventors. Not only can this lead to alienation, but it can also lead to legal issues. For example, a patent may be invalid if incorrect inventors are intentionally named. During litigation, a defendant may also be able to identify an unnamed inventor and obtain an assignment from them, thereby qualifying as a co-owner of the patent and no longer subject to the litigation.
Inventorship has been described as “one of muddiest concepts in the muddy metaphysics of the patent law.” Mueller Brass Co. v. Reading Industries, Inc., 352 F.Supp. 1357, 1372 (E.D.Pa. 1972). Determining inventorship is a complex issue that is undertaken on a much stricter basis than authorship of a scientific publication. It can also be a particularly contentious issue when people are not named as inventors. Not only can this lead to alienation, but it can also lead to legal issues. For example, a patent may be invalid if incorrect inventors are intentionally named. During litigation, a defendant may also be able to identify an unnamed inventor and obtain an assignment from them, thereby qualifying as a co-owner of the patent and no longer subject to the litigation.
27 June 2017
RACI BDDG Nanomedicine Panel Discussion | July 4
FB Rice is pleased to partner with the Royal Australian Chemical Institute for the Bioactive Discovery and Development Group Event on Tuesday 4 July
FB Rice is pleased to partner with the Royal Australian Chemical Institute for the Bioactive Discovery and Development Group Event on Tuesday 4 July
Lee Miles

Associate

Lee Miles

Lee is an Associate in the Biotechnology team in the Sydney office of FB Rice. He provides a range of intellectual property services to clients, with experience in preparing and prosecuting patent applications, co-ordinating prosecution of global patent portfolios, providing patentability, validity and freedom-to-operate opinions, and providing commercially relevant advice to assist clients in developing strong protection of their intellectual property. Lee works with a range of clients both domestically and abroad, including start-up companies, universities, research institutes and large multi-nationals.

Lee is an Associate in the Biotechnology team in the Sydney office of FB Rice. He provides a range of intellectual property services to clients, with experience in preparing and prosecuting patent applications, co-ordinating prosecution of global patent portfolios, providing patentability, validity and freedom-to-operate opinions, and providing commercially relevant advice to assist clients in developing strong protection of their intellectual property. Lee works with a range of clients both domestically and abroad, including start-up companies, universities, research institutes and large multi-nationals.

25 May 2017
FB Rice Perth welcomes new staff members
FB Rice is delighted to announce new additions to their Perth office – Associate Carol Kane and Trainee Attorney Otto Saha. Both Carol and Otto join the firm at a period of continued growth in Perth, where FB Rice continues to meet the needs of their local client base.
FB Rice is delighted to announce new additions to their Perth office – Associate Carol Kane and Trainee Attorney Otto Saha. Both Carol and Otto join the firm at a period of continued growth in Perth, where FB Rice continues to meet the needs of their local client base.
Interfering RNA (iRNA) is no interference to manner of manufacture in Australia
The Australian Patent Office (APO) has determined that claims directed to a composition comprising double-stranded RNA (so-called “interfering RNA” or “iRNA”) is a manner of manufacture (patent eligible subject matter) in accordance with Section 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act.
The Australian Patent Office (APO) has determined that claims directed to a composition comprising double-stranded RNA (so-called “interfering RNA” or “iRNA”) is a manner of manufacture (patent eligible subject matter) in accordance with Section 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act.