This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

The Patent Linkblog gives me a place to collect all of the great patent-related links that I come across in my travels on the web.

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

The Manual of Patent Office Practice (MOPOP), published by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), occupies a position in Canadian patent law comparable to that occupied by the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) in United States patent law. It is published to provide patent examiners, applicants, agents, and the public in general with a guide on the procedures and practices relative to the prosecution of patent applications in Canada under the current Patent Act and Patent Rules.

Much like the MPEP, the Manual is considered solely as a guide and, indeed, CIPO notes that it “should not be quoted as an authority.” For legal authority on patent issues, the Patent Act, Patent Rules, and decisions of the Courts interpreting the Act and the Rules should be consulted.

The CIPO MOPOP page contains a Table of Contents and a link for downloading a .pdf of the current Manual.

The Patent Act

Department of Justice outline-based display

Printable display

David J. French
613.567.7824 x 2230
Direct line: 613.232.8389
dfrench@miltonsllp.com
David practices intellectual property law, with an emphasis on the prosecution of patents in Canada and around the world. He advises firms on corporate patenting strategies and procedures, litigation, and licensing. He has expertise in the mechanical, electrical and basic chemistry fields.
A professional engineer and registered patent agent, David was called to the Bar in 1971. His experience also includes acting as special advisor to the Canadian government on international developments, and law reform in patent, trademark, and copyright law.
Education
McMaster University (B.Sc. Engineering Physics), and theUniversity of Toronto (LL.B.)
Associations
Ontario Society of Professional Engineers
Licensing Executive Society (USA/Canada)
Intellectual Property Institute of Canada

General information

CIA World Fact Book entry

Courts

Supreme Court of Canada - Cour suprême du Canada

Federal Court - Cour fédérale

Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO):

Canadian Patents Database

Canadian Trade-marks Database

Canadian Industrial Designs Database

Canadian Copyrights Database

Corporations Canada

Canadian Corporations Database

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

J. Matthew Buchanan has been blogging patent law and policy issues since January, 2004. He created the original Promote the Progress site just before “patent reform” achieved official buzzword status. He’s a recognized expert that frequently speaks on patent law and policy issues, including all flavors of patent reform in the United States.

Recognizing the global nature of various patent policy movements, Mr. Buchanan began restructuring Promote the Progress as a portal of patent law information from all corners of the globe. He started the portal project in January, 2008 and hopes to complete it before he retires.

Mr. Buchanan is a registered United States Patent Attorney and is Of Counsel to Dunlap Codding. His full professional biography is available here.

In the media

Books

Under your Byline - 7 steps to getting your bylined article published in the publications that matter most, by David Freedman and Paula Levis Suita (available as part of the Get Good Press series for lawyers, from Eminent Publishing Company)

Naked Conversations: How blogs are changing the way businesses talk with customers, by Robert Scoble and Shel Israel (available at Amazon)

Journals, Newspapers, and Magazines

Laboratory Industry Report - ‘First to File’ Patent Reform Efforts Underscore Labs’ Need to Protect IP (January, 2008) (an article that explores things companies in the lab industry can do to prepare for coming patent reform) (subscription required)

National Law Journal - Lawmakers lag behind in patent reform - High court, PTO make strides; Congress slowed by big tech, big pharma (May 7, 2007) (an article by Marcia Coyle about the advancement of patent reform in the Courts and the Patent and Trademark Office, and the stalling of reform efforts in Congress; various JMB quotations regarding the Supreme Court’s decision in KSR v. Teleflex and the changing dynamics of patent reform legislation) (subscription required)

IP Law & Business - Newsmakers column: Carter Phillips: Winning the eBay Case (2006 Almanac) (an article by Jake Thomas about Carter Phillips, lead counsel for eBay in eBay v. MercExchange; JMB quotation regarding Federal Circuit injunctive relief law prior to eBay; not available online)

Boston Bar Journal - Supreme Court Ends Special Treatment for Patent Injunctions (an article by Howard Susser and Jerry Cohen discussing eBay v. MercExchange; citation to Promote the Progress as a resource)

LawyersUSA - U.S. Supreme Court Begins New Term (Patent cases in forthcoming 2006-2007 Supreme Court term)

IP Law 360 - House Subcommittee OKs $1.77B USPTO Funding Bill (USPTO appropriations and fees) (subscription required)

Washington Internet Daily (Congressional hearings on patent trolls, subscription required)

Law Practice (The American Bar Association’s magazine on the Business of Practicing Law) - Blog 2.0 - The Next Stage of Lawyer Blogging (the future of law blogging, written by Tom Mighell)

Dragonfire (Drexel University’s award-winning online magazine) - Possible Patent Pandemonium in a Pandemic? Avian flu poses a risk to future drug development (compulsory licensing)

Genetic Engineering News (compulsory licensing)

Business Week (patent reform legislation, subscription required)

Inc. Magazine online (patent reform legislation)

Nature Biotechnology (patent reform legislation, subscription required)

Articles

American Laywer Media’s Law.com (article on Supreme Court case eBay v. MercExchange)

American Lawyer Media’s Law.com (2005 review and top story)

Other Projects

After four years of writing the Promote the Progress blog using MoveableType, I decided to turn the site into a web-based portal of patent law information based on WordPress Mu. I’ll document some of my development adventures here (dev.promotetheprogress.com) on the development blog in hopes that it becomes a resource for the Mu community.

United States patent law has seen significant change over the last several years.  The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court have introduced major changes into several fundamental concepts of patent law, including obviousness and injunctive relief.  All this while Congress continues to explore legislative patent reform and the Patent and Trademark Office explores its ability to effect change.

This is an example of a WordPress page, you could edit this to put information about yourself or your site so readers know where you are coming from. You can create as many pages like this one or sub-pages as you like and manage all of your content inside of WordPress.

Canadian patent law is a kind of hybrid of the laws existing in the United States and United Kingdom: a first-to-file system applying absolute world novelty as between strangers, but providing a one-year grace period that permits prefiling public disclosure of an invention if the disclosure originates from the patent applicant - “a self-originating one-year grace period”. Examination of newly filed applications is automatically deferred for five years.