<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Biotechnology Patent Law Blog &#124; Patents4Life by Warren Woessner &#187; Non-U.S. Practice</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patents4life.com/category/non-u-s-practice/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patents4life.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 14:44:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://www.patents4life.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Biotech IP Newsletters</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/12/biotech-ip-newsletters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/12/biotech-ip-newsletters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Stefan Danner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=1697</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Find below biotech IP newsletters recently provided by Dr. Stefan Danner. SPCs For Combination Products &#8211; Opinion Of The Advocate General EPO Ruling On The Patentability Of Medical Treatments By Therapy &#160;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/12/biotech-ip-newsletters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>One step ahead and one step backward for the EU patent</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/one-step-ahead-and-one-step-backward-for-the-eu-patent/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/one-step-ahead-and-one-step-backward-for-the-eu-patent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[camilla rendal nielsen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU Treaty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zacco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=936</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The following is a contribution from Camilla Rendal Nielsen of Zacco Denmark A/S 1.   The EU Competiveness Council have authorised “enhanced cooperation” in the area of unitary patent protection, and. 2.   The EU court now states that the proposed Patents Court is not compatible with the provisions of the EU Treaty. The European Competiveness Council have [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/one-step-ahead-and-one-step-backward-for-the-eu-patent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canadian Ruling Supports “Antibody Exception”</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/canadian-ruling-supports-%e2%80%9cantibody-exception%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/canadian-ruling-supports-%e2%80%9cantibody-exception%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[borden ladner gervais]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[centocor v. abbott]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=931</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In my recent post on the Centocor v. Abbott decision, I noted that the Fed. Cir. had at least preserved the “antibody exception,” which I define as permitting broad claims to structurally uncharacterized antibodies (monoclonal and polyclonal) if the structure of the antigen is known (and preferably is novel) and methods of preparing the antibodies [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/canadian-ruling-supports-%e2%80%9cantibody-exception%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Scheme For Maximizing The Benefits Available Under The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/a-scheme-for-maximizing-the-benefits-available-under-the-patent-prosecution-highway-pph/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/a-scheme-for-maximizing-the-benefits-available-under-the-patent-prosecution-highway-pph/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:38:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mark Horsburgh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=906</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post is from Mark Horsburgh of Fisher Adams Kelly in Australia. Summary File in Australia first; Request expedited examination (report issues within 3 months); Address objections and obtain acceptance; File in USA and request entry to PPH (faster and fewer office actions); File PCT designating EPO as ISA; Amend claims for best possible prosecution [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/03/a-scheme-for-maximizing-the-benefits-available-under-the-patent-prosecution-highway-pph/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mumbo Jumbo: The Patentability of Biological Materials In Australia</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/mumbo-jumbo-the-patentability-of-biological-materials-in-australia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/mumbo-jumbo-the-patentability-of-biological-materials-in-australia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:22:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pizzeys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vaughn Barlow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Vaughn Barlow of Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. 1. Introduction The Patent Amendment (Human Genes and Biological Materials) Bill (2010) is currently being debated before the Australian parliament. The Bill seeks to ban the patenting of all biological material that is “identical or substantially identical to such materials as they exist in nature”. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/mumbo-jumbo-the-patentability-of-biological-materials-in-australia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>European Union Patent Update</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/european-union-patent-update/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/european-union-patent-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[camilla rendal nielsen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[denmark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[european union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zacco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=848</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Authored by Ms. Camilla Rendal Nielsen of Zacco Denmark A/S Latest news: Finally on the road towards an EU patent: Only Spain and Italy so far outside proposal to create a new EU-patent After failing to reach an agreement on an EU patent in December particularly due to Spain’s persistent opposition to leaving out Spanish [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/european-union-patent-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divided We Fall – New Rules Limit Divisional Applications in Australia</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/divided-we-fall-%e2%80%93-new-rules-limit-divisional-applications-in-australia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/divided-we-fall-%e2%80%93-new-rules-limit-divisional-applications-in-australia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:01:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[APO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Australia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill Bennett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divisional applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pizzeys]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=836</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is a guest post from Bill Bennett of Pizzeys. Where a divisional application presents claims for examination which have been previously rejected in the parent (or grand-parent) application, then the APO will give the applicant only 2 months to respond and overcome the rejection (rather than the usual 21 months). If the applicant does [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/divided-we-fall-%e2%80%93-new-rules-limit-divisional-applications-in-australia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>UK Patent Applications On The Fast Track – Nothing Extra Payable</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/uk-patent-applications-on-the-fast-track-%e2%80%93-nothing-extra-payable/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/uk-patent-applications-on-the-fast-track-%e2%80%93-nothing-extra-payable/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 22:27:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CSE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fast track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Cole]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCT application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK IP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=812</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Guest post from Paul Cole of Lucas &#38; Co. Claims searched, examined and approved for grant (subject to publication and possible third party comments) within six working days? Not only theoretically possible but actually achieved in an application filed earlier this year at the UK IP Office through our firm. And in contrast to the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2011/02/uk-patent-applications-on-the-fast-track-%e2%80%93-nothing-extra-payable/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EMA Draft Guidelines For Biosimilar Antibodies Released</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/ema-draft-guidelines-for-biosimilar-antibodies-released/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/ema-draft-guidelines-for-biosimilar-antibodies-released/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biotechnology law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Stefan Danner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EMA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=734</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Dr. Stefan Danner On November 18, 2010, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) released draft versions of two guidelines relating to the regulatory approval of monoclonal antibodies: the &#8220;Guideline on biological medicinal products containing monoclonal antibodies&#8221;1 and the &#8220;Guideline on immunogenicity assessment of monoclonal antibodies intended for in vivo clinical use&#8221;.2 Both guidelines are now [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/ema-draft-guidelines-for-biosimilar-antibodies-released/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newsflash! EPO announces that it does not require search results from priority applications filed at the USPTO, JPO and UKIPO</title>
		<link>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/newsflash-epo-announces-that-it-does-not-require-search-results-from-priority-applications-filed-at-the-uspto-jpo-and-ukipo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/newsflash-epo-announces-that-it-does-not-require-search-results-from-priority-applications-filed-at-the-uspto-jpo-and-ukipo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 15:40:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Warren Woessner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Non-U.S. Practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EPO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP law tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marks & clerk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warren Woessner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patents4life.com/?p=669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Marks &#38; Clerk &#8211; This is a correction to the post of December 10th. Late yesterday &#8211; December 9, 2010 &#8211; a decision of the President of the European Patent Office (EPO) was posted on the EPO website confirming that the search results from a priority application filed at the US Patent Office (USPTO), Japan [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.patents4life.com/2010/12/newsflash-epo-announces-that-it-does-not-require-search-results-from-priority-applications-filed-at-the-uspto-jpo-and-ukipo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

