Osha Attorneys
Osha Attorneys
Osha Attorneys
Osha Attorneys
Attorney search
Search by

The collective expertise of our global team distinguishes OBWB in the field of Intellectual Property Law. We align our best resources to meet each client's specific needs and we treat each matter with the highest degree of attention and care.

12600 Hill Country Blvd.
Suite 275, Austin   TX 78738
P: 512.480.0667
F: 713.228.8778

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
12F, Excel Centre, 6 Wudinghou Street
Xicheng District, Beijing   100033

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
1200 Pearl St. Ste. 314
Boulder, CO   80302
P: 713.228.8600
F: 713.228.8778

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
8/F, Hangzhou Kerry Center
385 Yan An Rd.
Hangzhou, China   310006
P: +86.571.2689.2537
F: +86.571.2689.2700

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
1100 Louisiana Street
Suite 4900
Houston, TX   77002
P: 713.228.8600
F: 713.228.8778

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
2 Rue de la Paix
75002 Paris, France
P: +33.1.4494.8630
F: +33.1.4494.8631

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
Level 28 Shinagawa Intercity Tower A
2-15-1 Konan Minato-ku
Tokyo, Japan   108-6028
P: 81.3.6717.2877
F: 81.3.6717.2878

Directions
Click here to Get directions.
Newsletter Archive Links

The Out-of-Europe Reach of European Patents

While all eyes are on the unitary patent which will initially make it possible to get patent protection in 17 of the EU Member States through a European patent, the geographical coverage of European patents, far from being limited to the EU, extends beyond the geographical limits of Europe, to both Asia and Africa. A single European patent application filed with the EPO thus offers the chance to obtain protection in no less than 44 countries.

United States Supreme Court Reviews The Enablement Requirement For The Second Time in History

Most patent litigation cases do not hinge on questions of whether the patents-in-suit meet the enablement requirement. As a result, these issues do not often reach the Supreme Court of the United States. That has now changed. For the second time in history, the Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to review a case to address the enablement question.

Working on It: An Overview of Patent Working Requirements, Part 2

As clients and legal counsel begin to develop global patent portfolios, one topic comes up annually: working requirements. A working requirement is a provision of a national patent statute that states an owner of a patent must practice the patented invention within the country that granted the patent. To satisfy the requirement, a patent owner may need to build new manufacturing capacity in the country, utilize existing capacity in the country, or license the patented invention to a third-party for manufacturing the patented invention, or perform the patented process, locally. Consequences for not working a patented invention in contravention of local statutes may include monetary sanctions, as well as potential for loss of patent rights or compulsory licenses to third parties.

Patent Application Pendency in Various Countries: Part 4

As clients begin to develop global patent portfolios, an effective practitioner will be aware of basic information related to application filing and pendency in locales where protection is sought. This article provides a high-level look at application pendency, grant rates, and effects of lapse in select countries in Southeast Asia and Oceana.

Europe: Entry into Operation of The Unified Patent Court is Closer Than Ever

The Preparatory Committee of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has published a roadmap according to which, based on current state of the implementation thereof, the UPC could start receiving cases on April 1, 2023. As from that date, provided the roadmap plan is respected, a new patent litigation system will be available in Europe, and only "opted out" European patent applications/patents will be preserved from revocation by the UPC. However, requests for unitary patent protection will be available even earlier.

Do Courts Still Owe Deference to The Actions of USPTO Examiners?

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently revised a previously issued opinion to delete all references to the notion that the particular choices and actions of patent examiners are owed some degree of deference in district court litigation on the issue of patent validity. Does this signal a general retreat from the concept of examiner deference?

Working on It: An Overview of Patent Working Requirements, Part 1

As clients and legal counsel begin to develop global patent portfolios, one topic comes up annually: working requirements. A working requirement is a provision of a national patent statute that states an owner of a patent must practice the patented invention within the country that granted the patent. To satisfy the requirement, a patent owner may need to build new manufacturing capacity in the country, utilize existing capacity in the country, or license the patented invention to a third-party for manufacturing the patented invention, or perform the patented process, locally. Consequences for not working a patented invention in contravention of local statutes may include monetary sanctions, as well as potential for loss of patent rights or compulsory licenses to third parties.

Patent Application Pendency in Various Countries: Part 3

As clients begin to develop global patent portfolios, an effective practitioner will be aware of basic information related to application filing and pendency in locales where protection is sought. This article provides a high-level look at application pendency, grant rates, and effects of lapse in select countries in Gulf States.