Janet gained a first class honours degree in Biochemistry and was subsequently awarded a Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) Doctoral Training Account studentship to fund her PhD, which she successfully completed.

 

She also received a City and Guilds Licentiateship Award in Applied Biochemistry (awarded for year in industry at Syngenta, completed as part of BSc degree).

 

As part of her PhD, Janet researched differences in gene expression between cells transformed with oncogenic and non-oncogenic adenoviruses, and identified targets for further investigation into the biochemical mechanisms. During her PhD, Janet also undertook an introductory module on intellectual property rights and patents. 

 

Subsequently, Janet taught science and gained a master's degree in the Management of Intellectual Property Law. She was in the professional stream which enabled her to sit two additional exams (CITMA Trade Mark Law, CIPA Patent Law), in order to obtain the Postgraduate Certificate in Intellectual Property Law. She was also awarded the EIPIN Diplôme d'Honneur for attending the 14th European Intellectual Property Institutes Network (EIPIN) Conference, held at Maastricht University, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and Maison Interuniversitaire des Sciences de l'Homme - Alsace (MISHA), which involved working in a team of international students from Maastricht, Alicante and Strasbourg universities to produce a report on the relationship between human rights and intellectual property law.

 

Janet has been able to build on her knowledge of trade mark, copyright, design and patent law during the course of her employment as a paralegal, working in the IP section of international law firms, and as an intern for a legal consulting firm. This has widened her experience of the critical analysis, discussion and debate of intellectual property issues. She enjoys communicating ideas and has authored and co-authored many publications, including papers in the field of legal developments, scientific research papers, together with her PhD thesis.

 

Janet passed the Chartered Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys (CITMA) Paralegal Course in 2018 and is a paralegal member of CITMA.

 

Publications:

 

'Policy Shapes the Law as Court of Appeal Considers KitKat'. Fox, A. and Strath, J. (2017). Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (in press). [Publisher Abstract]

'Unwired Planet v Huawei: The FRAND Injunction'. Cross, J. and Strath, J. (2017) Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 178-180 (in press).

 

'Royal Mint fails to win gold as SOVEREIGN trade mark falls short'. Strath, J. and Fox, A. (2017). Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 541-543. 

 

'Humira patent rights shot by "Fujifilm declaration'. Kunst, M. and Strath, J. (2017). European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 518-524.

'Fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms: can the court set a FRAND rate?', Cross, J. and Strath, J. (2017). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 112-115. 

'Family of marks cannot save Apple as iWatch application fails'. Fox, A., Webster, M., and Strath, J. (2017). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 120-122.

'Lyrica decision upheld by Court of Appeal'. Thompson, C. and Strath, J. (2017). Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 158-160.

 

'Keywords plunge bidders into hot water, but is "honest concurrent use" a watertight defence?', Strath, J. and Ravenscroft, L. (2017). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 44-47. 

'Common general knowledge and the importance of being plausible: Idenix Pharmaceuticals Inc v Gilead Sciences Inc'. Hutchinson, A. and Strath, J. (2017). European Intellectual Property Review, vol.39, no. 3, pp. 185-190. 

'UK Patents Court confirms a dosage regimen can be considered inventive, even if it would have been obvious from the prior art to conduct a clinical trial'. Strath, J. (2017). European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 49-53. 

'Revocation of Cubist patents for obviousness: strictly the same invention?', Hutchinson, A. and Strath, J. (2016). European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 638-644.

'FRANDly competition: a partial win for Samsung'. Heaney, M. and Strath, J. (2016). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 144-146.

'Lost in conversion: Unwired Planet and Huawei and Samsung'. Heaney, M. and Strath, J. (2016). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 94-97.

'Wait 'til the midnight hour: that's when prior art comes tumbling down'. Heaney, M. and Strath, J. (2016). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 76-78.

'Rovi v Virgin: a box of delights that needed trying'. Strath, J. (2015). Entertainment Law Review, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 302-305. 

 

'Technically unpatentable: invention fails to bring more to the party than the software alone'. Strath, J. (2015). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 21-23. 

 

'Philips v Nintendo: irre-console-able differences mean Wii have a problem'. Strath, J (2015). Entertainment Law Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 25-29.

 

'Smartphone patent wars: European Commission adopts anti-trust decisions on enforcement by Motorola and Samsung of standard essential patents'. Strath, J (2014). Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 127-129.

 

'What makes someone a de facto director?', Strath J, Harris P (2014), Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 447-448.

 

'Courts have no general power of review over EPO grant procedure decisions'. Strath J, Harris P (2014), Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 349-351. 

 

'HTC v Nokia: a brief comparison of UK and US exhaustion/first sale doctrines'. Harris P, Strath J (2014), European Intellectual Property Review, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 266-271.

 

'Cartoon Network's BOOMERANG trade mark thrown out by General Court for likelihood of confusion'. Strath, J (2014), Entertainment Law Review, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 24-26.

 

'You've got unpatentable subject matter: Lantana Ltd v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks'. Strath, J (2013), Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 223-225.

 

'Don't Say it with AdWords: Interflora Inc v Marks & Spencer Plc'. Hetherington L, Strath J (2013), Computer and Telecommunications Law Review, no. 5, pp. 25-28. 

 

'AETN v Discovery - a bold claim consigned to history?', Strath, J (2013), Entertainment Law Review, vol. 24, no.3, pp. 98-100. 

 

'Identification of genes differentially expressed as result of adenovirus type 5- and adenovirus type 12-transformation'. Strath J, Georgopoulos LJ, Kellam P, Blair GE (2009), BMC Genomics, vol. 10:67. 

 

'Adenovirus subversion of immune surveillance, apoptotic and growth regulatory pathways: a model for tumorigenesis'. Strath J, Blair GE (2006), Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 145-169.