Invention and Assignment of Patents
by Pamela Chestek • October 28, 2008 • patent
A couple of ownership cases of interest. First, Oren Tavory failed in his effort to join in the NTP jackpot also known as the RIM settlement – he’s not a co-inventor because he didn’t have evidence that his contribution to the invention was more than simply the exercise of ordinary skill in the art. Tavory v. NTP, Patent Hawk here, Patently-O here.
And from Thorn Security Ltd v Siemens Schweiz AG  EWCA Civ 1161, the IPKat brings a tail of registration of a patent after merger. The Court of Appeal (England and Wales) held that the registration of the “assignment” of a patent as described in Patents Act 1977 section 33(3), a necessary step before one could collect damages for patent infringement by operation of section 68 (now amended to cover only costs), includes acquisition of ownership by any means, including merger.