The DLS Portal will be offline for maintenance and upgrades from 6.00pm (AEST) Friday, 12 September 2025 to 8.00am (AEST) Monday, 15 September 2025.
Patents – Revocation - Obviousness or lack of inventive step - Patent for an oral pharmaceutical preparation - Whether invention obvious and did not involve an inventive step having regard to what was known or used in Australia on or before priority date - Combination of integers - Preparation arrived at by group of pharmaceutical chemists after period of experimental research - Whether hypothetical non-inventive worker in the field would have been led directly as a matter of course to pursue one avenue in expectation that it might well produce claimed invention - Relevance of publications discoverable by "routine literature search" but not found to have been part of the common general knowledge in Australia at the priority date - Whether invention obvious if it was apparent to a non-inventive skilled worker that it would be "worthwhile to try" each of the integers that was ultimately successfully used - Relevance of attempts to replicate the process of invention by a skilled person aware of the desired result - Whether attempts futile.
Appeal – Whether decision of primary judge in respect of obviousness affected by legal error - Where conclusions of primary judge affirmed by Full Court of the Federal Court.
Patents Act 1952 (Cth) – s 100(1)(e).