There may have been little rest and relaxation over the Christmas and New Year period for lawyers working on behalf of the Australian Patent Office because, as
I predicted back in December, on 16 January 2019 the Commissioner of Patents filed an application in the Federal Court of Australia for leave to appeal the decision of a single judge in
Rokt Pte Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2018] FCA 1988. In that judgment, Justice Alan Robertson found that a claimed method and system for providing ‘a dynamic, context-based advertising system, introducing a distinction between an engagement offer, without a direct advertising benefit, and an advertisement designed to lead directly to the sale of the product’ is patent-eligible subject matter under the Australian ‘manner of manufacture’ test. In doing so, he reversed the decision of a Patent Office Hearing Officer, who had found that ‘the substance of the invention in this case amounts to business innovation’, which was not patentable, and therefore refused Rokt’s patent application:
Rokt Pte Ltd [2017] APO 34.
There is no great surprise in this move by the Commissioner. As I have previously noted, judgment is pending in the appeal from
Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v InfoTrack Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 421 – a case that
has been heard by an expanded bench of five judges, and which concerns similar issues to those which arose in
Rokt.
The Commissioner of Patents intervened in the
Encompass appeal, and the
Institute of Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys of Australia (IPTA) also
sought to intervene, and filed written submissions. The outcome in
Encompass could well change the understanding of the law relied upon by the judge in
Rokt. The Commissioner will therefore want to ensure that the opportunity to have the facts in
Rokt reconsidered under the law to be explained in
Encompass is not lost.
The
Encompass and
Rokt cases are not the only appeals currently before the Federal Court in respect of Patent Office decisions refusing applications for patents on computer-implemented inventions. The other ongoing cases are:
- Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents (NSD1343/2018), which is an appeal from Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited [2018] APO 45, and is scheduled to be heard on 2-4 September 2019; and
- Repipe Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents (WAD323/2018), which is an appeal from Repipe Pty Ltd [2018] APO 42, and is scheduled to be heard on 25-27 June 2019.
With the
Encompass judgment expected in the first half of the year, and the Rokt, Aristocrat and Repipe appeals likely to be heard subsequently (assuming they are not resolved between the parties in the wake of the
Encompass decision), 2019 could be the year – at last – that we get some clarity around what is, and is not, patent-eligible when dealing with computer-implemented inventions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment