A patent is a document, issued, upon application, by a government office (or a regional office acting for several countries), which describes an invention and creates a legal situation in which the patented invention can normally only be exploited (manufactured, used, sold, imported) with the authorization of the holder of the patent. ‘Invention’ means a solution to a specific problem in the field of technology. An invention may relate to a product or a process. The protection conferred by the patent is limited in time, generally 20 years. In a number of countries, inventions are also protectable through registration of a ‘utility model’ or ‘short-term patent’.
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…
When the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) endeavour was in the process of being designed back in the day, its architects presented the project as an example of a one-in-a-kind cosmopolitan litigation forum, the seat of patent judges and litigators from all cultures, skills, backgrounds, languages and walks of life. A cosmopolitan court that would set…
On 25 October 2023, HHJ Hacon (sitting as a High Court Judge), rendered his judgment in Philip Morris v Nicoventures[1]. The Claimants (“PMI”) sought revocation of EP (UK) No. 3 367 830 B1 (“EP 830”) and the defendants (“BAT”) counterclaimed for infringement. EP 830 was held to be invalid for lack of inventive step and…
…well, at least the EPO’s Boards of Appeal, represented by their President Mr. Josefsson, are. Mr. Josefsson announced in the Boards of Appeal and key decisions 2023 conference just a few minutes ago that in view of the feedback received by users (including yours truly) he will no longer pursue the planned shortening of the…
On October 24, 2023, the Brazilian government released an Action Plan aiming at fostering the National Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy. The plan was prepared by the Interministry IP Group ( a group created in 2019 to coordinate the federal government activities in the field of intellectual property. Thirteen Ministries form part of GIPI, and the…
The Unitary Patent system is doing much better than expected, with almost 80 cases in the first six months and about 20-25% of new European patents converted to UPs, according to Paul England. He is senior counsel at Taylor Wessing and co-author of the Practitioner’s Guide to the Unified Patent Court and the Practitioner’s Guide…
