Course Syllabus

PATENT LAW, INDUSTRIAL DESIGN AND PLANT VARIETY PROTECTION

Atty. Lolibeth Ramit-Medrano & Atty. Ignacio S. Sapalo
Second Semester, SY 2014-2015
Reference:
Robert Patrick Merges and John Fitzgerald Duffy, PATENT LAW AND POLICY: CASES AND
MATERIALS (Fifth Edition 2011)
Nov 21
I.

Introduction
A. Framework and General Principles of Intellectual Property System
B. History of the Patent System
Reading:
Chapter 1 : Introduction, Patent Law and Policy: Cases and Materials , pp. 1-13, Robert
Merges & John F. Duffy, 5th edition (2011)
C. History and Development of the Philippine Patent System
D. Sources of Patent Law
1. 1987 Philippine Constitution
Article XII, Secs. 6, 14
Article XIV, Secs. 10 - 18
2. International Agreements
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of the Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS
Agreement)
Reading:
Introduction to the TRIPS Agreement, pp. 1-8, 10-14, 16-18, A Handbook on the WTO
TRIPS Agreement, Antony Taubman, Hannu Wager and Jayashree Watal (2012)
TRIPS Law and TRIPS Politics: Legal Clarity and Policy Flexibility, pp. 1-8, 10-14, 1618, A Handbook on the WTO TRIPS Agreement, Antony Taubman, Hannu Wager and
Jayashree Watal (2012)
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property
Patent Cooperation Treaty

International Conventions and Reciprocity (Section 3, Republic Act No. 8293, IP Code of
the Philippines
1

Reverse Reciprocity of Foreign Laws (Section 231, IP Code)

3. Laws
a. Civil Code of the Philippines
Arts. 712, 521
b. Republic Act 8293 - Intellectual Property Code (IPC) of the Philippines
c. Republic Act 9150 - Protection of Lay-Out Designs of Integrated Circuits Act
d. Republic Act 9168 - Philippine Plant Variety Protection Act
e. Republic Act 9502 Cheaper Medicines Act

II. Patents
A. General Principles of Patents
B. Types of Patents
1. Invention (Sec. 21, IPC)
2. Utility Model (Section 109.1, IPC)
3. Industrial Design (Secs. 112, 113, 119.1, IPC)
4. Lay-Out Designs Republic Act 9150 (Topographies of Integrated Circuits RA 9150
amending RA 8293)
C. Term of Protection
Article 33, TRIPS Agreement (Invention)
Sec. 54, IP Code (Invention)
Section 109.3, IP Code (Utility Model)
Article 26.3, TRIPS Agreement (Industrial Design)
Section 118, IP Code
D. IP Code Provisions on Patents
1. Patentable Inventions (Section 21, IPC)
2. Purpose
Manzano vs. Court of Appeals, 278 SCRA 688
Pearl & Dean v. Shoemart, 409 SCRA 231 (2003)
Reading:
Report on the International Patent System, pp. 7 22, WIPO Standing Committee on the
Law of Patents 12th Session (2008) available http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/scpen/
scp_12_3.pdf
2

The Nature and Function of the Patent System, Edmund Kitsch, The Journal of Law and
Economics, pp. 265 -291
Nov. 28
Article 3 (National Treatment), TRIPS Agreement
Article 4 (Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment), TRIPS Agreement
3. Non-Patentable Inventions
Section 22, IPC as amended by Republic Act 9502, Cheaper Medicines Act
Article 27, TRIPS Agreement
Republic Act No. 9168, Plant Variety Protection Act
Section 32 and 34 of the Indigenous Peoples Right Act
a. Discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods
OReilly v. Morse, U.S. 62 (1854)
The Telephone Cases, 126 U.S. 1 (1888)
b. Living Things
Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303
i)

Natural Products and Substances

-Naturally Occurring but Artificially Packaged
Funk Bros. Seed v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U.S. 127 (1948)
-

Naturally Occurring but Isolated and Purified

Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO (The Myriad Case), 569
U.S. 12

Reading:
Bioethics and Patent Law: The Case of Myriad available at
http://www/wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2006/04/article_0003.html
c. Programs for Computer
Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. ___ (2014)
Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63
Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175
3

Bilski v. Kappos,130 S.C.P. 3218

In re Bilski v. Kappos, 545 F.3d 943, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
EU Approach vs. US Approach
Article 52, European Patent Convention
35 U.S. Code 101 - Inventions patentable

d. Methods of Doing Business

State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc. 927 F.Supp. 502
EU Approach vs. US Approach
e. Medical Procedure
Pallin v. Singer, 36 U.S.P.Q.2d 1050
f. Drugs and Medicines
Section 5, Republic Act 9502 amending Section 22 of the IP Code
Section 3(d), Indian Patent Law
Novartis AG v. Union of India & Others (decided by the India SC, April 2013)
Dec 5 Office Visit and Patent Search on November 26, 2014
Dec 12
4. Patentability Criteria
Article 27.1, TRIPS Agreement
a. Novelty (Sections 23-24, IPC)
Vargas vs. FM Yaptico & Co., 40 Phil 195
Vargas vs. Chua, 57 Phil 206
Manzano vs. CA, 278 SCRA 688
Maguan vs. CA, 146 SCRA 107
Frank vs. Kosuyama, 59 Phil 206
a.1
i)
ii)

Standard for Anticipation

Identity Requirement
In re Robertson, 169 F.3d 743, 49 U.S.P.Q. 2D 1949 (Fed Cir. 1999)
Accidental and Unknown Anticipations and the Doctrine of Inherency
4

iii)

Schering Corp. vs. Geneva Pharmaceuticals, 339 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir.
2003)
Enablement Standard for Anticipation
In re Hafner, 410 F.2d 1403 (C.C.P.A 1969)

a.2 Known by others

National Tractor Pullers Association v. Watkins, 205 U.S.P.Q. 892 (N.D.
Ill, 1980)
a.3 Used by others
Rosaire v. Barroid Sales Division and National Lead Co., 218 F.2 (5th Cir.
1955)
a.4 Printed Publication
In Re Klofsten, 380 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
a.5 Non-prejudicial Disclosure (Sec. 235, IP Code)
b) Inventive Step (Section 26, IP Code as amended by RA 9502)
Aguas vs. De Leon, 111 SCRA 238
Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966)
December 19 - Quiz on January 9
Subtests of Non-Obviousness
KSR International v. Teleflex, Inc. , 550 U.S. 398 (2007)
In Re Kubin, 561 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
Scope and Content of Prior Art
In re Winslow, 365 F 2d 1017, 177 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 48 (C.C.P.A)
Hazeltine Research v. Brenner, U.S. 252 (1965)
Non-analogous Arts Limitation
In re Clay, 966 F.2d 656, 23 U.S.P.Q.2D 1058 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
Non-obviousness in Chemistry
In re Papesch, 315 F.2d 381, 137 U.S.P.Q. 43 (C.C.P.A. 1963)
In re Baird, 16 F.3d 380, 29 U.S.P.Q.2D 1550 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
Non-obviousness in Biotechnology
In re Deuel, 51 F.3d 1552, 34 U.S.P.Q.2D 1210 (Fed. Cir. 1995)

c) Industrial Application (Section 27, IP Code)

Beneficial Utility
Lowell vs. Lewis, 15 Fed. Cas. 1018 (C.C.D. Mass. 1817)
Juicy Whip, Inc. v. Orange Bang, Inc. 183 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 1999)
January 16 Midterm Week
January 23
Practical or Specific Utility
Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519, 148 U.S.P.Q (BNA) 689 (1966)
Fujikawav. Wattanasin, 93 F.3d 1559 (Fed. Cir. 1996)
In re Brana, 51 F.3d 1560, 34 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1436 (Fed. Cir. 1995)
In re Fisher, 421 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2005) MIDTERMS
5. Disclosure and Enablement
Article 29, TRIPS Agreement
Section 35, IP Code
a.

Undue Experimentation
The Incandescent Lamp Patent, 159 U.S. 465 (1895)
In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 8 U.S.P.Q.2d 14000 (Fed. Cir. 1988)

b. Speculation and Prophesy

Janssen Pharma v. Teva Pharms, 583 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
c. Uses of examples in the specification
In re Strahilevitz, 668 F.2d 1229, 212 U.S.P.Q. 561 (C.C.P.A 1982)
d. Written Description Requirement
Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahhurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 19 U.S.P.Q.2d 1111
e.

Limitations on Amendments
Section 49, IP Code
The Gentry Gallery, Inc. v, The Berkline Corp., 134 F.3d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 1998)
6

f.

Definite Claims
Orthokinetics v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc. 806 F.2d 1565, 1 U.S.P.Q. 2d 1081 (Fed.
Cir. 1986)

6. Ownership of Patent and Transfer of Rights

Secs. 28-30, IP Code
Secs. 67-70, IP Code
Sec. 236, IP Code
Albana vs. Director of Patents, 93 Phil. 113
January 30
9. Applicant
Secs. 28-30, IP Code
Sec. 68, IP Code
Sec. 3, IP Code
Secs. 231, 235, IP Code
10. Patent Application Process
Secs. 32-39, 8, IP Code
Secs. 108, 109.2, IP Code (Utility Models)
Secs. 114-115, IP Code (Industrial Design)
10.1. Priority Date, Section 31, IP Code
Boothe vs. Director of Patents, 95 SCRA 446
10.2 Filing Date, Secs. 40-41, IP Code
Section 116, IP Code (Industrial Design)
10.3. Formality Examination, Section 42, IP Code
10.4 Classification and Search, Section 43, IP Code
10.5 Publication
Confidentiality Before Publication, Section 45, IP Code
Publication, Section 44 IP Code
Rights Conferred After Publication, Section 46, IP Code
7

10.6. Third Party Observation, Section 47, IP Code

10.7 Request for Substantive Examination, Section 48, IP Code
10.8 Amendment, Section 49, IP Code
10.9. Issuance or Refusal of Patent
Secs. 50-51, 53, IP Code
Secs. 117, 119, IP Code (Industrial Design)
10.10 Publication Upon Grant of Patent
Section 52, IP Code
11. Annual Fees and Effect of Non-Payment
Section 55, IP Code
12. Surrender, Correction, Changes and Amendment of Patent
Secs. 56 60, IP Code
13. Cancellation of Patent
a. Grounds
Secs. 61, 82, IP Code
Sec. 109.4 , IP Code (Utility Model)
Sec. 120, IP Code (Industrial Design)
b. Proceedings
Secs. 62-66, IP Code
Sec. 230, IP Code
14. Rights of a Patentee
a. Rights Conferred by Patent
Sec. 71, IP Code
Parke Davis & Co. vs. Doctors Pharmaceuticals, 124 SCRA 115
b. Limitations
Art. 30, TRIPS Agreement
Sec. 72, IP Code as amended by RA 9502
8

Secs. 73-74, 231, IP Code

Readings:
WTO DSB 414: Canada - Pharmaceutical Patents available at
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_edispu_e/7428d.pdf
(Complainant:
European
Communities)
Roche Products v. Bolar Pharmaceuticals Co., 733 F.2d 858, U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 937
Fed. Cir. 1990)
15. Interpreting Claims
Merrill v. Yeomans, 94 U.S. 568 (1877)
Philips v. Awh Corporation, 415 F.3d 1303 (2005)
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370 (1996)
February 6 - Atty. Sapalo
16. Doctrine of Equivalents (Atty. Sapalo)
Winans v. Denmead, 56 U.S. 330 (1854)
Exhibit Supply Co., v. Ace Patents Corp., 315 U.S. 126 (1942)
Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v.Line Air Products, 339 U.S. 605 (1950)
Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Chemicals Co., 520 U.S. 17 (1997)
Smith Kline Beckman Corp. vs. CA (G.R. No. 126627, August 14, 2003)
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co, Ltd., 535 U.S. 722 (2002)
February 13 & February 20 Atty. Sapalo
17. Enforcement of Patent Rights, Patent Infringement (Atty. Sapalo)
A. Civil Action for Infringement (Literal and Equivalent)
Sec. 76, IP Code as amended by RA 9502
Sec. 75, IP Code
B. Criminal Action for Repetition of Infringement
Sec. 84, IP Code
.
C. Administrative Proceedings
Sec. 10.2, IP Code
9

D. Party Who Can Initiate?

Sec. 77, IP Code
Creser Precision System, Inc. v. CA, 286 SCRA 13
E. Presumptions
Sec. 78, IP Code
F. Damages
Secs. 79-80, IP Code
G. Defenses
Sec. 81, IP Code
H. Cancellation of Invalidated Patent
Sec. 82, IP Code
I. Assessors Disregard
Sec. 83, IP Code
Frank vs. Benito, 51 Phil. 72
Frank vs. Kosuyama, 59 Phil. 206
G. Sell vs. Yap Jue, 12 Phil. 519
Maguan vs. CA, 146 SCRA 107
Godines vs. CA, 226 SCRA 338
Del Rosario vs. CA, 255 SCRA 152
February 27 18. TRIPS Flexibilities
Sections 7 15, Republic Act No. 9502
WTO Ministerial Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health
(WT/MN(01)/DEC/2 (Doha Declaration) adopted November 14, 2001
WTO General Council Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the
Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health adopted August
30, 2003
WTO General Council Decision on Amendment of the TRIPS Agreement adopted
December 6, 2005
10

Arts. 30 31, TRIPS Agreement

Art. 31(bis), TRIPS Agreement
Republic Act 9502 Cheaper Medicines Act
19. Voluntary Licensing
Secs. 85-92, IP Code
20. Compulsory Licensing
Secs. 93-95, IP Code as amended by RA 9502
Secs. 96-102, IP Code
Price vs. United Laboratories, 166 SCRA 133 (1988)
Smith Kline vs. CA, 276 SCRA 224
Smith Kline vs. CA, 368
III. Other International Agreements
A. Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Micro-organisms for
the Purpose of Patent Procedure
B. Convention Establishing the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
March 6
IV. Trends and Emerging Issues
A. Harmonization of Patent Laws
B. Patent Work Sharing Initiatives
1. Patent Prosecution Highway
2. ASEAN Patent Search and Cooperation Programme
C. Patent and Biotechnology
D. Patent and Genetic Resources
Readings:
1. Bioethics
and
Patent
Law:
The
Relaxin
Case
available
at
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2006/02/article_0009.html
2. Bioethics and Patent Law: The Case of the Oncomouse available at
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2006/03/article_0006.html
V. Plant Variety Protection Act
A. Purpose
B. Conditions for Protection
C. Term of Protection
D. Process for Registration

11

Republic Act 9168 Philippine Plant Variety Protection Act

March 13
VI.

Patent Drafting and Claims Analysis not included

March 16 25 Finals Week

Course Requirements & Grading System:
Class Recitation 1/3%
Midterm Exam 1/3%
Final Exam
1/3%
Bonus Paper* (+ 1- 2 pts. of final grade)
Perfect Attendance ** (bonus point)
*Bonus Paper: Bonus Paper : Reaction/Reflection Paper on an assigned topic:
3-5 pages, Times New Roman font 12, short bond, 1 inch margin, 1.5 space
Background/Introduction (2-3 paragraphs)
Discussion of Issues/Reflection (select only 2 issues) at least 2 pages
1. A Feature of the Patent System objective/rationale, disclosure principle, extent of
exclusive rights, patentability criteria
2. A Limitation or Strength of the Patent System
3. Doctrine of Equivalents: Does It Foster or Curtail Innovation?
4. Patent Pools: Tools for Innovation
5. Should Genetic Materials Be Patented?
Recommendations (at least 1 page)

12