March 12, 2014
Webinar
The requirements for inventive step in Europe and non-obviousness in the U.S. have many similarities but also some subtle differences. In most cases, you might expect similar results, but you can end up with very different outcomes. With global patenting strategies, companies often struggle to ensure consistency when prosecuting applications to grant in both jurisdictions.
In this webinar, we shall look closely at obviousness at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), inventive step at the European Patent Office (EPO), how they are both assessed and how objections can be overcome. This panel will explore what works for combating objections at one of these patent offices and why it may not necessarily work at the other, strategies that can work for both, as well as additional approaches to consider in both jurisdictions.
Please join us for this detailed analysis and discussion of these two giants of patent prosecution. Discussion topics will include:
Bryan C. Diner
Leythem A. Wall
Date:
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
15:00 - 16:00 GMT
16:00 - 17:00 CET
11:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. EDT
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
Webinar
Obviousness of Biologics Inventions: Strategies for Biologics Claims in the U.S., Europe, and China
May 28,2024
Webinar
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.