RAM Spreaders makes successful challenges to a Rotainer patent in a hearing at the national patent office.
Following a recent hearing at the National Patent Office in Canberra, Australia RAM Spreaders had succeeded in the opposition against a Rotainer-AMMESA patent application.
The National Patent office found in the opposition hearing brought by NSL, that an AMMESA Patent application relating to apparatus for handling of containers for bulk purposes lacked novelty as it did not involve any inventive steps; and as a result the patent was not granted to AMMESA.
Company AMMESA submitted a Patent application relating to apparatus for the handling of containers for bulk purposes. The patent was for a container tipping device for which there are extensive prior patents.
RAM Spreaders parent company (NSL) raised concerns that the new patent was surprisingly similar to older patents, and supplied extensive examples of these patents to the national patent office which showed the old patent art. This included two American patents and documents prepared by RAM founder, Robert Arthur Mills.
The RAM Spreaders (NSL) concerns were raised in the form of a ‘notice of opposition’ under various subsections of the Patents Act 1990, insofar as the invention, as claimed, is not a patentable invention as it is not novel.
In March of 2017, the opposition hearing was held at the National Patent Office in Canberra. National Patent Office Delegate Mr. Ed Knock, who chaired the hearing, deliberated the evidence brought before him by the opposition RAM Spreaders (NSL) against the patent application submitted by AMMESA.
Click here to read the full article which includes the decision and conclusion to the case.