Patent rights rules

Second, WTO rules authorize governments to use compulsory licenses for pharmaceutical products. Thus, the expected benefits of the patent right to the patentee are reduced, and this maybe of particular importance in the case of neglected diseases. This does not mean that the use of compulsory licenses is inappropriate, but there can be no question that it may reduce the potential profits of patentees, and hence harms their incentives to undertake research on neglected diseases. 

A further consideration is the differences in disclosure rules set by different countries, as discussed above under novelty. As has been discussed, if an invention is publicly disclosed before an application is hied, it may limit the countries in which patent protection may be sought. For example, once disclosure is made, an inventor may be barred from obtaining a patent in the United Kingdom. For this reason, disclosure should never occur before the decision about where patent rights will be sought, as patent applications themselves are a form of disclosure. 

The Court of Appeals determined that the dismissal for lack of case or controversy was, in fact, a court decision, because the brand-name company indicated that the second generic applicant s ANDA did not infringe the relevant patent. As a result, the dismissal activated the court decision trigger. Such a rule eliminates the potential for a bottleneck created by a first generic applicant that does not exercise its commercial marketing rights. 

As mentioned before, the inventor himself has the right to prosecute an application. If the Patent Office receives a response signed by the inventor (in an application in which there is an attorney of record), any amendment therein will be entered, and the response will be acted upon. However, in this action the Patent Office will call attention to the rule which specifies that correspondence will be held with only one person. 

Patent systems throughout the world are today based on the principle of territorial rights. As an invention will be protected only in a state in which a patent has been applied for and granted, inventors and applicants are forced to apply for patents for an invention in several states. This involves the use of different laws and rules aud a cousiderable fluan-cial outlay. Inventors and applicants are often confronted with the legalistic problems and phraseology of the world of patent protection. 

In some situations, companies may be reluctant to distribute products without a patent. For example, a company may own a new chemical compound that is useful in its own industrial processes, which it would sell for use by the general public if it could retain its proprietary right in the chemical. However, if the chemical is readily analyzable, distribution would destroy the company s trade secret rights. Lack of a patent therefore is impeding sale of the product. The Patent and Trademark Office rules provide that, where lack of a patent is preventing distribution of a product, a patent applicant may apply to have its application made special and expedited. 

---