Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Legal Requirement to Announce Changed Deadlines - Generally, law does not explicitly require patent or legal authorities to notify clients or applicants of deadline changes once the deadline has been modified, especially if the change is made officially and communicated through proper channels. For instance, in patent proceedings, the USPTO's practice involves notifying parties of deadline extensions or changes, but there is no strict legal obligation to inform clients directly if the deadline has already been altered by the authority ["EDWARD CHARLES TROPPI SMYTHE vs THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS - Madras"].
Implication of Deadline Changes and Communication - In cases where deadlines are extended or altered (e.g., patent examination requests or deadlines for submissions), the key is that the authority's decision to change the deadline is legally valid and communicated through official means. The user must ensure that they are aware of such changes, but the law does not mandate a specific obligation to announce these changes to clients proactively ["EDWARD CHARLES TROPPI SMYTHE vs THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS - Madras"]; ["WATEROTOR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INC Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. - Delhi"].
Case Examples and Court Practices - Courts and administrative bodies tend to focus on whether the deadline was legally extended and properly communicated through official notices or documents, rather than whether the authority explicitly announced the change to the client. For example, in patent proceedings, the USPTO's extension of deadlines (such as for final decisions) is considered valid if properly documented, regardless of whether the client was directly notified ["Purdue Pharma L.P. vs Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. - Federal Circuit"].
Conclusion - As a patent executive worker, it is not strictly required by law for the authority to announce deadline changes directly to clients once the change has been officially made and documented. However, best practice involves ensuring that clients are kept informed of such changes through official communications to prevent unintentional lapses or misunderstandings ["EDWARD CHARLES TROPPI SMYTHE vs THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS - Madras"]; ["WATEROTOR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INC Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. - Delhi"].
References:- ["Purdue Pharma L.P. vs Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. - Federal Circuit"]- ["EDWARD CHARLES TROPPI SMYTHE vs THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PATENTS DESIGNS - Madras"]- ["WATEROTOR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INC Vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR. - Delhi"]
In the fast-paced world of intellectual property (IP) management, deadlines are critical. Patent executives, agents, or workers often juggle complex filings, extensions, and procedural updates. But what happens when a deadline changes? As a patent executive worker, is it required by law to announce the deadline to the client if the deadline has already been changed?
This question strikes at the heart of professional responsibilities in patent practice, particularly under Malaysian law. While transparency builds trust, the legal obligation—or lack thereof—can impact compliance and client relationships. This post dives into the legal analysis based on key documents, explores related principles from broader case law, and offers practical recommendations. Note: This is general information, not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for your situation.
The core takeaway from relevant Malaysian legal documents is clear: there is no explicit legal requirement for a patent executive worker to announce or notify a client of a deadline once it has been changed. The Patents Act 1983 and Patents Regulations 1986 emphasize procedural compliance and contractual terms but do not impose a specific duty to inform clients of modifications unless stipulated in the agreement itself. PAN ASIATIC TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR vs NUCTECH COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL - 2023 MarsdenLR 1249VERONICA SAINIK @ RONALD vs MELUHA LIFE SCIENCES SDN BHD & ORS - 2024 MarsdenLR 694
Key points include:- No statutory provision mandates client notification for deadline changes in patent procedures. PAN ASIATIC TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR vs NUCTECH COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL - 2023 MarsdenLR 1249VERONICA SAINIK @ RONALD vs MELUHA LIFE SCIENCES SDN BHD & ORS - 2024 MarsdenLR 694- Contractual terms govern such obligations; without explicit clauses, no legal duty arises. GLOBE ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs BINA JATI SDN BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 83- Best practices favor transparency, but it's not legally enforced in the reviewed texts. RCB MARKETING SDN BHD vs MILANO MARKETING SDN BHD - 2022 MarsdenLR 1448
This absence of mandate shifts focus to contracts, professional norms, and risk management.
Reviewing the Patents Act 1983 and Patents Regulations 1986 reveals a focus on core procedures like register examination, patent filing, and rights contestation—but nothing on notifying clients about deadline shifts. For instance, these laws outline procedural rights without specifying notification duties for modifications. PAN ASIATIC TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR vs NUCTECH COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL - 2023 MarsdenLR 1249PATRICK M G MIRANDAH vs KETUA PENGARAH PERBADANAN HARTA INTELEK MALAYSIA - 2005 MarsdenLR 2776
The documents prioritize adherence to timelines and safeguards, yet stop short of requiring professionals to relay changes to clients proactively. This leaves room for interpretation based on context.
Contracts are pivotal. Legal texts stress formal agreements for payments, rights, and procedures, but do not automatically impose notification duties unless the contract says so. Case insights reinforce that absent such terms or regulations, no breach occurs from silence on changes. GLOBE ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs BINA JATI SDN BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 83VERONICA SAINIK @ RONALD vs MELUHA LIFE SCIENCES SDN BHD & ORS - 2024 MarsdenLR 694
In practice, savvy patent executives include notification clauses to cover this gap.
Related provisions touch on communication in contempt or liquidation matters, but these are tangential to patent deadlines. TAN SRI DATO DR ROZALI ISMAIL & ORS vs LIM PANG CHEONG & ORS - 2011 MarsdenLR 1312WONG SIN FAN & ORS vs NG PEAK YAM & ANOR - 2011 MarsdenLR 1355 No direct link mandates client alerts for patent-specific changes.
While Malaysian patent documents are silent, broader legal contexts highlight the value—and occasional necessity—of notification. These examples from international and domestic sources illustrate risks of poor communication around deadlines.
Solicitor Undertakings and Deadlines: In one case, a plaintiff breached an extended deadline (from 3 August 2022 to 4 January 2023) by failing to deposit funds, underscoring enforcement of undertakings given to clients or courts. Where a solicitor who is acting professionally for a client gives his personal undertaking... that undertaking may be enforced summarily.AHT SYNGAS TECHNOLOGY NV vs FUTURE NRG SDN BHD This emphasizes professional accountability, even if not directly about patents.
Clear Communication in Academic Timelines: An Indian court stressed notifying students of deadline amendments amid pandemics: Executive Council's amendments regarding academic timelines must be clearly communicated to students... to avoid confusion and ensure compliance. The court extended a thesis deadline due to miscommunication between bodies. This parallels patent scenarios where unclear updates could lead to disputes.
Tender and Bid Extensions: Courts have upheld extensions via subsequent notices, even post-deadline, if tender terms allow. Deadline for bid submission may be amended by a subsequent communication issued by employer after expiry of deadline.Larsen and Toubro Ltd. having its registered office at L and T House VS SJVN Thermal (P) Ltd. - 2019 Supreme(Pat) 1742 Failure to notify or follow debriefing timelines invalidated claims in another bid rejection. Rama K Gupta vs Panchayat And Rural Development Deptt - 2025 Supreme(Gau) 153
Regulatory Strictness: In medical approvals, incomplete applications due to missing consents were rejected rigidly: The time schedule stipulated in the Regulations... was sacrosanct.Travancore Medical College VS Union of India - 2019 Supreme(Del) 189 Similarly, land acquisition notifications under strict timelines were quashed for procedural lapses. Albert Emmanual VS Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Shipping Road Transport & Highways, New Delhi - 2023 Supreme(Mad) 816
US and Immigration Contexts: Changed conditions or good cause can excuse missed deadlines, but authorities must assess post-facto. The BIA was instead required to assess whether Rodriguez had established good cause... for not meeting the IJ’s deadline.Alcarez-Rodriguez vs Garland - 2023 Supreme(US)(ca9) 3 This shows flexibility where notification gaps exist.
These cases, though not binding in Malaysian patents, demonstrate a recurring theme: courts favor transparency to prevent prejudice, especially when changes affect parties' rights. Lack of notice can invite challenges, even if not legally required.
Consider these scenarios:- Contractual Stipulations: If your client agreement mandates updates on deadlines, failure to notify breaches the contract.- Regulatory Guidelines: Unreferenced rules from patent offices might impose duties.- Professional Codes: Industry ethics (e.g., solicitor undertakings) could apply indirectly. AHT SYNGAS TECHNOLOGY NV vs FUTURE NRG SDN BHD- Jurisdictional Variations: In tenders or approvals, strict notice is often key. Rama K Gupta vs Panchayat And Rural Development Deptt - 2025 Supreme(Gau) 153Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth VS All India Council For Technical Education - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 610
Even without a legal hammer, proactive steps protect against claims:- Notify Proactively: Inform clients of changes promptly, documenting via email or portal.- Embed in Contracts: Add clauses like Agent shall notify Client within 24 hours of any deadline modification.- Maintain Records: Log all communications to prove diligence.- Leverage Technology: Use deadline trackers shared with clients.
To mitigate risks and ensure transparency, it is advisable for patent executives to proactively notify clients of any deadline changes. This aligns with norms in IP disputes. RCB MARKETING SDN BHD vs MILANO MARKETING SDN BHD - 2022 MarsdenLR 1448
Under reviewed Malaysian patent laws, no explicit requirement exists for patent executives to announce changed deadlines to clients. Focus remains on contracts and procedures. PAN ASIATIC TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR vs NUCTECH COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL - 2023 MarsdenLR 1249GLOBE ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs BINA JATI SDN BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 83
However, related cases worldwide—from tenders to academics—highlight notification's role in averting disputes. Poor communication can erode trust or invite litigation, as seen in enforcement of undertakings or deadline extensions. AHT SYNGAS TECHNOLOGY NV vs FUTURE NRG SDN BHDLarsen and Toubro Ltd. having its registered office at L and T House VS SJVN Thermal (P) Ltd. - 2019 Supreme(Pat) 1742
For patent professionals: Prioritize transparency as a best practice. Review your agreements, stay updated on regulations, and communicate clearly. In IP's high-stakes arena, prevention trumps cure.
References:1. PAN ASIATIC TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD & ANOR vs NUCTECH COMPANY LIMITED & ANOR AND ANOTHER APPEAL - 2023 MarsdenLR 1249: Patent office procedures.2. VERONICA SAINIK @ RONALD vs MELUHA LIFE SCIENCES SDN BHD & ORS - 2024 MarsdenLR 694: Proprietor rights.3. GLOBE ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs BINA JATI SDN BHD - 2010 MarsdenLR 83: Contractual issues.4. PATRICK M G MIRANDAH vs KETUA PENGARAH PERBADANAN HARTA INTELEK MALAYSIA - 2005 MarsdenLR 2776: Examination safeguards.5. RCB MARKETING SDN BHD vs MILANO MARKETING SDN BHD - 2022 MarsdenLR 1448: IP disputes.6. TAN SRI DATO DR ROZALI ISMAIL & ORS vs LIM PANG CHEONG & ORS - 2011 MarsdenLR 1312, WONG SIN FAN & ORS vs NG PEAK YAM & ANOR - 2011 MarsdenLR 1355: Procedural contexts.
Stay compliant and client-focused—your practice depends on it.
#PatentLaw, #IPDeadlines, #LegalNotification
Congress had a clear intent to make patent review expedi- tious, which was reflected in the deadline in sec- tion 326(a)(11). But the importance of the deadline does not support denying authority after the deadline passes. ... Barnhart, 537 U.S. at 161 (statute set the deadline as “not later than 60 days after the enactment date”); Dolan, 560 U.S. at 607 (statute required action “not to exceed 90 days after sentencing”). ... This appears to be the only proceeding in which the Bo....
Application No.IN202447028876 and to process the same in accordance with law. ... The specific case of the petitioner is that the Indian Patent Agent responded by confirming that all the formalities have been completed. Thereafter, the Indian Patent Agent vide email dated 14.10.2024 sent a reminder that the deadline to file a request for examination is only on 08.04.2025. ... Thus, there seems to be an inadvertent omission on the part of the Indian Patent agent, who erroneously calculated the ....
GARLAND 13 removal proceedings, itself an already “disfavored” remedy even when filed within the statutory deadline. Delgado- Ortiz, 600 F.3d at 1150. Although petitioner attempts to rely on Singh v. ... Petitioner also argued that changed country conditions in Mexico excused the deadline. The IJ denied petitioner’s motion to reopen. ... Petitioner has not demonstrated that violence against law enforcement officers in Mexico has materially changed since 1997, or ....
HULU, LLC 13 ... consumed by the associated media stream client, the media stream manager submits a buffer re- quest and deadline for that buffer to the appropri- ate deadline queue. ... Buffer requests may be ordered in each deadline queue from the earliest to latest deadline. Each media stream manager may be configured to provide a guaranteed maximum media stream rate to its associated media stream client. ... a #HL_STA....
HULU, LLC 13 ... consumed by the associated media stream client, the media stream manager submits a buffer re- quest and deadline for that buffer to the appropri- ate deadline queue. ... Buffer requests may be ordered in each deadline queue from the earliest to latest deadline. Each media stream manager may be configured to provide a guaranteed maximum media stream rate to its associated media stream client. ... a #HL_STA....
Even if the Patent Agent had informed the client of issuance of the FER, there being no email forwarding of the same or informing next steps, leads to an adverse inference against the Patent Agent. 11. ... Patent Agents are now the only persons who can prosecute patents before the patent office and have enormous responsibility on their shoulders to ensure that valuable innovations are properly protected as per the procedures prescribed in law. ... An FER by its very nature is an extrem....
Although the deadline was already extended from 3 August 2022 to 4 January 2023, the plaintiff still failed to deposit the sum of RM100,000.00 into the Stakeholders' Account ("Breach No 2"). ... and Second Deadline. ... Where a solicitor who is acting professionally for a client gives his personal undertaking in that character to the client or to a third person, or gives an undertaking to the Court in the course of proceedings, that undertaking may be enforced summarily upon application to the ... to....
And, as already mentioned, Rule 50 contemplates that a new trial may be one result of a successful motion for judgment as a matter of law. FED. R. CIV. P. 50(b)(2). ... Because they characterize the Rule 50 deadline for seeking judgment as a matter of law as jurisdictional, the detectives argue that the district court lacked authority to decide the salary question. ... Even if the County was paying the detectives on a salary basis, the executive exemption required the County to also sh....
The BIA was instead required to assess whether Rodriguez had established good cause, after the fact, for not meeting the IJ’s deadline. ... The immigration judge denied this motion a month later, concluding that counsel’s difficulty in reaching her client did not constitute good cause for an extension. ... The BIA abuses its discretion when it “act[s] arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to law.” Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). ... GARLAND supporting evidence from her psychiatrist, a homeless....
A perusal of the decision of the EC dated 20 - 21st July 2019 shows that the Executive Council had clearly changed the deadline for submission of the thesis - may be, to bring the same in line with the Regulations of the DCI. ... The question as to whether the Executive Council's decision can be changed by the BRS and as to whether the BRS's minutes are genuine or not cannot be adjudicated at this stage without the pleadings of the parties. Mr. ... A reading of clause 15.1 along with Appendix III does n....
31.1, an unsuccessful Consultant has three (3) Business Days to make a written request to the Client for a debriefing. The Client shall provide a debriefing to all unsuccessful Consultants whose request is received within this deadline. 33.3 Where a request for debriefing is received by the Client later than the three (3)-Business Day deadline, the Client should provide the debriefing as soon as practicable, and normally no later than fifteen (15) Business Days from the date of publication of Public Notice of Award of contract. Requests for debriefing received outside the t....
The 3D notification is required to be issued within one year from the date of issuance of notification under 3A. It has to be ensured that this deadline is strictly adhered to.
It is to be noticed that the petitioner has approached the Court on 17.07.2019, much before the deadline came into effect. In considered opinion of this Court, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court Parshanath Charitable Trust (supra) is not applicable in view of the peculiar facts involved in the present case; inasmuch as the respondents themselves were lacking due promptitude and it was entirely their fault that petitioner could not get the desired approval.
It is submitted that had it been intention of the employer not to provide for any opportunity to extend the deadline for submission of the bids after expiry of the deadline, there was no reason as to why clause 16.2 of the ITB would not prescribe clearly the words ‘At any time prior to the deadline’. It is submitted that clause 16.2 confers a discretion on the employer to extend the deadline for submission of the bids by amending the bid documents in accordance with the ITB subclause 6.3 and in such case all rights and obligations of employer and bidders will thereafter be ....
4. On 4th April, 2018, the petitioner submitted an online application for starting of post-graduate courses in various clinical branches, for each of which the petitioner had to pay Rs. 4 lakhs, working out to a total of Rs. 26 lakhs. This is to certify that the Travancore Medical College, Kollam has submitted applications for starting/enhancement of seats of the following Medical PG/Super Speciality courses during the year 2019-2020. The petitioner also enclosed, with the application, a letter, dated 4th April, 2018, issued by the Kerala University of Health Sciences (hereinafter referred t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
