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.

 

Paul Whenman

Partner

Paul Whenman
"FB Rice is constantly growing and evolving to ensure that we’re up to date with the industry, while at the same time maintaining the high standard of service and technical expertise that we provide to our clients."
"FB Rice is constantly growing and evolving to ensure that we’re up to date with the industry, while at the same time maintaining the high standard of service and technical expertise that we provide to our clients."
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.
22 May 2017
Best method: the New Act
Any applicant for patent protection in Australia must disclose the best method for performing the invention known to it at the time of filing a complete application. Failing to disclose the best method will impact not just one or two claims, but can invalidate an entire patent.
Any applicant for patent protection in Australia must disclose the best method for performing the invention known to it at the time of filing a complete application. Failing to disclose the best method will impact not just one or two claims, but can invalidate an entire patent.
Ingrid Jafari

Patent Attorney

Ingrid Jafari
Ingrid joined FB Rice in 2014 and is a Patent Attorney in the ICT team. She graduated from The University of Western Australia with a Bachelor of Electrical/Electronic Engineering (Hons I) in 2009 and completed a PhD in the field of speech signal information processing in 2014. While obtaining her Bachelor’s degree Ingrid also studied at Purdue University’s Electrical and Computer Engineering department.

 

Ingrid joined FB Rice in 2014 and is a Patent Attorney in the ICT team. She graduated from The University of Western Australia with a Bachelor of Electrical/Electronic Engineering (Hons I) in 2009 and completed a PhD in the field of speech signal information processing in 2014. While obtaining her Bachelor’s degree Ingrid also studied at Purdue University’s Electrical and Computer Engineering department.

 

16 September 2017
FB Rice supports Marriage Equality in Australia
At FB Rice, we recognise that diversity is a strength and that we are a better firm for having people with different ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation and backgrounds.
At FB Rice, we recognise that diversity is a strength and that we are a better firm for having people with different ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation and backgrounds.
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.