News

The Brazilian Patent Office’s (BPO) “green patents” prioritized examination proceeding, which was initiated in April 2012 and has been yearly renovated for four consecutive years, has now been reissued on a permanent basis via Resolution No. 175 as per publication made in Brazilian Official Gazette No. 2396 of December 6, 2016.

Resolution No. 174 published by the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office on 6 December 2016 established new rules for Brazilian National Phases of PCT applications regarding assignment of priority rights and the assignment of the application.

Currently, there is a relevant discussion on what may be considered as public performance, particularly with relation to streaming activities. While there is a pending case before the Superior Court of Justice (Special Appeal REsp 1.559.264) where it is discussed whether streaming services may be classified as public performances, the lower Courts are already having their saying in this matter.

 It will come into force next Thursday (November 24, 2016) a new resolution issued by CADE (Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica), the Brazilian antitrust authority, that redefines the rules for the submission of “associative contracts” for prior approval.

Further to the ongoing discussion regarding ANVISA

(Brazilian FDA)'s role in the examination of pharmaceutical

patent applications, this is to briefly inform you that the

Attorney General's Office just recently issued the legal opinion number 0006-2015-AGU/PGF/PFE/INPI/COOPI-LBC-1.0 affecting Brazilian PTO's (BPTO) procedure on applications forward to ANVISA for purposes of prior consent approval.

After many years of scholarly and political debate within the National Congress, the new Brazilian Civil Procedure Code was passed into law last year and came in force in March 2016, replacing its 1973 predecessor. It is expected that the new rules of civil procedure will reduce litigation in Brazil by favouring alternative dispute resolution methods as well as by allowing and incentivising cooperation between the parties of lawsuits. In particular, we shall address some possible impacts for intellectual property litigation

The office was once again placed in Band 1 , the highest
place in the ranking.

Anderson Ribeiro assumes the Regulatory Law area of the office, focusing on Life Science Team.

The Superintendency of the Brazilian antitrust authority (Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica – CADE) has recommended the sanctioning of three major automobile manufacturers for infringing the economic order on grounds of an alleged abuse of intellectual

property rights.

The Brazilian trademark registration system is attributive of rights. A registration issued by the Brazilian Patent and

Trademark Office entitles the owner with rights to use the trademark throughout the Brazilian territory, on an exclusive basis.

Getting the Deal Through: Advertising & Marketing / 2016

Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in Getting the Deal Through: Advertising & Marketing 2016, (published in May 2016; contributing editor: Rick Kurnit, Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz, PC) For further information please visit www.gettingthedealthrough.com.

Article published on World Intellectual Property Review
Annual 2016.

Published on May 11, 2016, the Decree # 8,772/16 regulates Law #13,123/2015, which provides rules for the access to genetic resources and traditional knowledge and benefit sharing for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.

Kasznar Leonardos Advogados' litigation team, specialized

in Intellectual Property matters, discussed the concrete

implementation of the new Code of Civil Procedure

(effective as of March 18, 2016) in a workshop held in the

São Paulo offices, on March 4 and 5, marking the closing

of a profound cycle of studies on the subject.

On February 18, 2016 the Brazilian Patent & Trademark Office -BPTO enacted Resolution No. 161, regarding the disclaimer adopted in trademark registrations, in an attempt to standardize and bring transparency to the decisions rendered in the trademark application procedures.