Melvin Pang

Melvin Pang is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2013 to 2021. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patents and trademarks. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 25% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Melvin Pang has demonstrated expertise across 32 primary practice areas, with significant experience in patents and civil practice.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Patents	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Breach of Confidence	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized87% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trade Secrets	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Unfair Competition	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Pharmaceutical Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Passing Off	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Defamation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Well Known Trade Marks	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Groundless threats of infringement proceedings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trade names	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Professional Privilege	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Experiments	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Cannabis Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice0% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin Pang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Melvin Pang has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 8 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Amica Law LLC	8 cases	100% of cases	TMRG Pte Ltd v Caerus Holding Pte Ltd: Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off & Invalidity of Luke's Lobster Trade Marks(Jul 2021) Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Discovery of Documents in Patent Litigation(Aug 2018) Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Patent Infringement, Novelty, and Pleadings(Oct 2017)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Melvin Pang's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.6
Complex Cases: 2 (25%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	13%
Partial	32.0 parties avg	2.0	38%
Won	44.7 parties avg	4.7	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	27.0 parties avg	7.0
2016	22.7 parties avg	2.7
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2018	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2021	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Melvin Pang's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(13%)	13%
Partial	3(38%)	38%
Won	4(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	814,000.00	203,500.004 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2013	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2016	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2017	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	TMRG Pte Ltd v Caerus Holding Pte Ltd: Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off & Invalidity of Luke's Lobster Trade Marks 12 Jul 2021 Lukes Seafood LLC (Defendant)Won	12 Jul 2021	Lukes Seafood LLC (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantPlaintiffs' claims for trade mark infringement, passing off, and invalidation of the Luke's Lobster trade marks are dismissed.
2	Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Discovery of Documents in Patent Litigation 26 Aug 2018 Element Six Technologies Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent)Partial	26 Aug 2018	Element Six Technologies Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent): Specific discovery granted in partRequest 2 (limited) and Request 4(i) granted. Request 4(ii) disallowed, but explanation on affidavit ordered. Requests 3, 5, and 6 disallowed.
3	Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Patent Infringement, Novelty, and Pleadings 18 Oct 2017 Element Six Technologies Ltd (Plaintiff, Applicant, Respondent)Partial	18 Oct 2017	Element Six Technologies Ltd (Plaintiff, Applicant, Respondent): Combination Requests and Passage Requests allowedPlaintiff's application for further and better particulars of the Defence and Counterclaim and the Particulars of Objection was partially successful.
4	Clearlab SG Pte Ltd v Ma Zhi: Appeal on Costs Order Requires Leave 19 May 2016 LI YUEXIN (Respondent)Won	19 May 2016	LI YUEXIN (Respondent): Costs Order upheldJudge’s Costs Order in favour of the respondents in the sum of $270,000 excluding disbursements was upheld. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Caesarstone Sdot-Yam Ltd v Ceramiche Caesar SpA: Trade Mark Dispute over CAESARSTONE Mark 28 Mar 2016 CERAMICHE CAESAR SPA (Respondent)Lost	28 Mar 2016	CERAMICHE CAESAR SPA (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay costs to the applicant.
6	Clearlab v Ting Chong Chai: Costs for Breach of Confidence Claim 13 Oct 2015 Melvin Pang (Defendant)Won	13 Oct 2015	Melvin Pang (Defendant): Costs awardedJoint costs awarded to the seventh and eighth defendants in the sum of $270,000 plus reasonable disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Challenger Technologies v Courts Singapore: Trademark Infringement & Comparative Advertising 20 Aug 2015 COURTS (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD (Defendant)Won	20 Aug 2015	COURTS (SINGAPORE) PTE LTD (Defendant): Application for interim injunction dismissedPlaintiff's application for an interim injunction was dismissed, and the defendant was awarded costs of $4,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	AstraZeneca v Sanofi-Aventis: Patent Infringement, Medicines Act & Pharmaceutical Compositions 14 Mar 2013 Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant)Partial	14 Mar 2013	Sanofi-Aventis Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application allowed in partSanofi-Aventis's application for further particulars was partially granted.