Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick

Last updated

Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick
Company typePartnership
IndustryIntellectual Property
Founded1888
Headquarters3 offices in Australia
Key people
Andrew Massie (Managing Partner) Chris Schlict (Board Chair)
Number of employees
Approx. 140
Website www.pof.com.au

Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick (POF) is an Australian Intellectual Property firm. Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick has around 140 employees across offices in Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide. It also operates directly in New Zealand and Papua New Guinea. In 2013, the firm celebrated its 125th anniversary. Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick publishes a quarterly newsletter on IP, case studies, firm news and legal updates called 'Inspire'.

Contents

History

In 1888, William D. Rowlingson commenced practice as a registered Patent Agent in the then British colony of Victoria. This practice was operated from Melbourne, but encompassed the six original colonies (now Australian States) with their separate legislation for the protection of inventions, trade marks, designs and copyrights. In 1889 Albert Swanston, who had practiced independently as a registered Patent Agent, joined Rowlingson and they remained in partnership as Swanson & Rowlingson until 1892. Edwin Phillips then acquired the practice and renamed the business Phillips, Ormonde & Co.

Edwin Phillips, who had emigrated from England for health reasons, had a broad ranging interest in engineering. Phillips wrote and published a comprehensive handbook for inventors entitled The Inventor’s Aid, and a periodical The Scientific Australian . Upon his arrival in Australia from England in 1881, Edwin Phillips took up employment with the fledgling Australian Electric Light Company. He installed lighting plants at mines on behalf of that company, in Victoria and in the colony of Queensland. In 1885, he entered into the partnership of Phillips & Jacques, an engineering firm operating from Richmond, Victoria. Phillips was a director of several prominent Victorian companies and these outside directorships, engineering interests and other investments provided him with ample resources to pursue his interest in intellectual property law and to establish Phillips, Ormonde & Co.

Federation of the Australian colonies had been proposed in the 1850s. However, it was not until after the Intercolonial Convention in December, 1883 that a Bill to establish the Federal Council of Australasia was drafted. The Bill was sufficiently broad-ranging to foreshadow the Council having authority over patents of invention and discovery and copyright. After Federation in 1901, the drafting of legislation to give effect to that authority became necessary. The first Australian Patents Act came into effect in 1903, the Trade Marks Act 1905 and the Designs Act 1906. As a Patent Agent registered under the prior colonial legislation, Edwin Phillips was able to continue his practice following Federation and, in 1904, he was registered as a Patent Attorney under the Patents Act 1903. He continued his practice under the new Federal legislation until 1921, and died in 1923 at the age of 64.

After joining Phillips, Ormonde & Co., Cecil Woods LePlastrier was registered as a Patent Attorney in 1905. LePlastrier, one of the first to qualify for registration as a Patent Attorney under the official examination established pursuant to that Act, subsequently joined Phillips in partnership. Victor Kelson joined the firm around 1907 and was registered as a Patent Attorney in 1920. At that stage, Kelson was admitted to partnership and the firm name was changed to Phillips Ormonde LePlastrier & Kelson.

Cecil LePlastrier was the senior partner of Phillips Ormonde LePlastrier & Kelson until his death in 1952. Under the guidance of Cecil LePlastrier, the partnership expanded in 1938 to include both Geoffrey Sly, who was senior partner from 1952 until his death in 1964 and Bertram C. Fitzpatrick, (originally engaged by Edwin Phillips himself in 1919) who was senior partner from 1964 until his retirement in 1972. Under B. C. Fitzpatrick, the firm’s name was changed to Phillips Ormonde & Fitzpatrick in 1967.

Over the past 20 years the firm has expanded rapidly to its present size with more than 25 partners and more than 140 total staff.

Services

POF offers a comprehensive range of intellectual property services including:

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Industrial design right</span> Intellectual property rights

An industrial design right is an intellectual property right that protects the visual design of objects that are purely utilitarian. An industrial design consists of the creation of a shape, configuration or composition of pattern or color, or combination of pattern and color in three-dimensional form containing aesthetic value. An industrial design can be a two- or three-dimensional pattern used to produce a product, industrial commodity or handicraft.

A patent attorney is an attorney who has the specialized qualifications necessary for representing clients in obtaining patents and acting in all matters and procedures relating to patent law and practice, such as filing patent applications and oppositions to granted patents.

A trademark attorney or trade mark attorney or agent is a person who is qualified to act in matters involving trademark law and practice and provide legal advice on trade mark and design matters.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intellectual Property Office (United Kingdom)</span> Patent Office of the United Kingdom

The Intellectual Property Office of the United Kingdom is, since 2 April 2007, the operating name of The Patent Office. It is the official government body responsible for intellectual property rights in the UK and is an executive agency of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT).

The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) is the British professional body of patent attorneys.

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court in London is an alternative venue to the High Court for bringing legal actions involving intellectual property matters such as patents, registered designs, trade marks, unregistered design rights and copyright. Hearings are usually conducted in the Thomas More Building at the Royal Courts of Justice site in the Strand, or at the Rolls Building in Fetter Lane.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Howrey</span>

Howrey LLP was a global law firm that practiced antitrust, global litigation and intellectual property law. At its peak Howrey had more than 700 attorneys in 17 locations worldwide.

Dehns is a United Kingdom firm of patent and trade mark attorneys, with offices in London, Munich, Oslo, Oxford, Brighton, Manchester, Sandwich and Bristol. It was founded in 1920 by Frank Bernard Dehn.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">IP Australia</span> Australian government agency

IP Australia is an Australian Government agency, responsible for administering intellectual property law in Australia. The agency manages the registration of patents, trade marks, registered designs and plant breeder's rights in Australia. The agency sits under the Department of Industry, Science and Resources. From 1904 until 1998, the responsible government agency was called the Australian Patent Office (APO), which is now a division within IP Australia. The headquarters are located at Discovery House in Canberra, Australia, with offices in some capital cities. IP Australia has been an International Searching Authority (ISA) and International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) for patent applications filed in accordance with the Patent Co-operation Treaty since 31 March 1980. Australia is also a member of the Madrid system for trade marks, the Paris Convention for designs and the UPOV for plant breeder's rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">McAndrews, Held & Malloy</span> American intellectual property firm

McAndrews, Held & Malloy is a Chicago-based intellectual property law firm in the United States. It provides services with respect to intellectual property, antitrust and technology matters, and has a team of registered patent attorneys, agents and technology specialists. The firm serves clients ranging from companies to startups and universities.

Malcolm Royal was an Australian patent and trade mark attorney and intellectual property law educator.

The copyright law of Australia defines the legally enforceable rights of creators of creative and artistic works under Australian law. The scope of copyright in Australia is defined in the Copyright Act 1968, which applies the national law throughout Australia. Designs may be covered by the Copyright Act as well as by the Design Act. Since 2007, performers have moral rights in recordings of their work.

Q Todd Dickinson was an Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). He was an executive director of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), and had been mentioned by some sources for possible reappointment to his former post as director of the USPTO by the Barack Obama administration prior to the appointment of David Kappos to that post.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David Kappos</span> Director of the US Patent office

David "Dave" James Kappos is an attorney and former government official who served as Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) from 2009 to 2013. Kappos is currently a partner at New York law firm Cravath, Swaine & Moore.

Australian patent law is law governing the granting of a temporary monopoly on the use of an invention, in exchange for the publication and free use of the invention after a certain time. The primary piece of legislation is the Patents Act 1990. Patents are administered by the Commonwealth Government agency IP Australia. Australia is a member state of the World Intellectual Property Organization, and compliant with Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. This makes Australian patent law broadly comparable with patent law in other major countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intellectual property in Iran</span>

Iran is a member of the WIPO since 2001 and has acceded to several WIPO intellectual property treaties. Iran joined the Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property in 1959. In December 2003 Iran became a party to the Madrid Agreement and the Madrid Protocol for the International Registration of Marks. In 2005 Iran joined the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration, which ensures the protection of geographical names associated with products. As at February 2008 Iran had yet to accede to The Hague Agreement for the Protection of Industrial Designs.

Donaldson & Burkinshaw is one of the oldest independent law partnership in Singapore. It was established on 6 November 1874. Today, the firm is a medium-sized, full-service law practice.

Kenji Sugimura is a Japanese architect and patent attorney. He is Principal Patent Attorney of Sugimura & Partners.

Murgitroyd is an international practice of intellectual property attorneys, headquartered in Glasgow, which specialises in patents, trade marks, designs and copyrights. The practice was established in 1975 and currently has 22 offices worldwide, and over 440 employees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Design infringement</span> Breach of intellectual property rights

Design is a form of intellectual property right concerned with the visual appearance of articles which have commercial or industrial use. The visual form of the product is what is protected rather than the product itself. The visual features protected are the shape, configuration, pattern or ornamentation. A design infringement is where a person infringes a registered design during the period of registration. The definition of a design infringement differs in each jurisdiction but typically encompasses the purported use and make of the design, as well as if the design is imported or sold during registration. To understand if a person has infringed the monopoly of the registered design, the design is assessed under each jurisdiction's provisions. The infringement is of the visual appearance of the manufactured product rather than the function of the product, which is covered under patents. Often infringement decisions are more focused on the similarities between the two designs, rather than the differences.