A short but nevertheless interesting judgment was handed down last week on the different roles that technical experts on the one hand and scientific advisers on the other have to play in proceedings in the English Patents Court.   The decision of Mellor J followed a case management conference in an entitlement dispute between Dr Vanessa…

Following the issuance of G 2/21 last year, we asked whether the plausibility elephant had left the room. Our Kluwer colleague and friend Miquel Montañá discussed this issue more recently here. Several decisions have meanwhile been issued applying the new “test” in G2/21, the lucidity of which may have reminded readers of the oracle of…

The Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (BRPTO) has issued a new set of guidelines to clarify its recent regulations on amending patent claims during the appellate phase and help patent applicants adapt to the new policy. Last month, we published an article regarding the decision rendered by the President of the BRPTO on 12 December…

Opt-outs are dealt with in Part IV of the UPC Agreement entitled “Transitional Provisions”. The prevailing view is that these provisions should be interpreted to mean that an opted-out patent is no longer subject to the jurisdiction of the UPC and the opt out shall remain in place for the lifetime of the patent. Furthermore,…

On 19 December 2023, the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in The NOCO Company v Shenzhen Carku Technology Co., Ltd  [2023] EWCA Civ 1502. The issue on appeal was whether communications between The NOCO Company (“NOCO”) and Amazon amounted to a “threat of infringement proceedings” for the purpose of s. 70 Patents Act…

On 20 December 2023, the UK Supreme Court handed down its highly anticipated judgment in the case of Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks [2023] UKSC 49, unanimously ruling that only a natural person can be named as an inventor on a patent application.  In doing so, the Supreme Court upheld the decisions…

As readers will be well aware, one of the preferred hobbies of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) is to issue controversial judgments in intellectual property matters which, quite often, instead of providing guidance to national courts, raise more questions than they answer. After the Christmas break, the CJEU seems to have…

The EPO’s Boards of Appeal are famously strict on added matter. But normally applicants can sleep soundly at night after making amendments based entirely on the original dependent claims having appropriate back references, especially where the amendments still cover the examples. T 1137/21 however might cause some applicants sleepless nights, as the Board found the…

Yes and no, it seems. Well, yes and then no, if recent French decisions are anything to go by. In short, Hesitations Blues reign. This attitude is all the more interesting given that the question, which arose more especially in the FINGOLIMOD case, has been raised before several European courts, all of which are opposed…