Patent & Trade Mark
Attorneys
We are
Experts in Navigating IP in the Asia Pacific Region
Working with clients in
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.
Joanne Martin

Partner

Joanne Martin
"Many Australian businesses look to China as offering opportunities for business growth both in China and globally. China is recognised as a complex and challenging market, however businesses trading successfully with China tend to be more competitive both domestically and in the international market in response to those learnings."
"Many Australian businesses look to China as offering opportunities for business growth both in China and globally. China is recognised as a complex and challenging market, however businesses trading successfully with China tend to be more competitive both domestically and in the international market in response to those learnings."
New Zealand to introduce a one-year grace period
New Zealand looks set to introduce a new one-year grace period into the Patents Act 2013 after ratifying the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) on 25 October 2018.
New Zealand looks set to introduce a new one-year grace period into the Patents Act 2013 after ratifying the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) on 25 October 2018.
07 May 2018
New Zealand relaxes support required for amending patent specifications
Based on a recent decision by New Zealand’s Intellectual Property Office (IPONZ), patent applicants wishing to amend the specification during examination in New Zealand no longer need to provide a specific statement of support in the original specification for each and every proposed amendment.
Based on a recent decision by New Zealand’s Intellectual Property Office (IPONZ), patent applicants wishing to amend the specification during examination in New Zealand no longer need to provide a specific statement of support in the original specification for each and every proposed amendment.
Ronelle Geldenhuys

Senior Associate

Ronelle Geldenhuys

Ronelle is a qualified Australian Patent Attorney with a strong background in electronics, computer networks, communication systems, mine automation and domestic appliances. Her experience spans drafting, infringement and patentability opinions and the prosecution of applications in Australia, the United States, Europe, China and South America.

Ronelle is a qualified Australian Patent Attorney with a strong background in electronics, computer networks, communication systems, mine automation and domestic appliances. Her experience spans drafting, infringement and patentability opinions and the prosecution of applications in Australia, the United States, Europe, China and South America.

08 February 2018
FB Rice Trade Marks team ranked Tier 1 for Prosecution - MIP
For the fourth year in a row, our Trade Marks team has been ranked Tier 1 for Trade Marks prosecution by Managing Intellectual Property. The IP STARS survey is recognised by the IP industry globally as a key benchmark for the industry.
For the fourth year in a row, our Trade Marks team has been ranked Tier 1 for Trade Marks prosecution by Managing Intellectual Property. The IP STARS survey is recognised by the IP industry globally as a key benchmark for the industry.
Australia: Change to patent examiners manual creates uncertainty
It is a long-standing principle of Australian patent law that determining whether or not a patent application is directed towards patentable subject matter should be done separately to determining issues of novelty and inventive step. However, amendments to the Australian Patent Examiners Manual late last year introduced a new practice, encouraging consideration of prior art when assessing subject matter eligibility, which in Australia includes the requirement that the invention be a manner of manufacture.
It is a long-standing principle of Australian patent law that determining whether or not a patent application is directed towards patentable subject matter should be done separately to determining issues of novelty and inventive step. However, amendments to the Australian Patent Examiners Manual late last year introduced a new practice, encouraging consideration of prior art when assessing subject matter eligibility, which in Australia includes the requirement that the invention be a manner of manufacture.