The Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) confirmed a second instance court judgment considering, inter alia, the effect of a later exclusive patent license contract having the same subject matter as an earlier one and the effect of (non-)registration of an exclusive patent license contract and its termination with the Bulgarian Patent Office (BPO). Case…
The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court upheld a first instance judgment annulling the decision of the Bulgarian Patent Office to refuse the grant of a supplementary protection certificate for a medical product where the active ingredient was functionally defined in the patent claims rather than through its structural formula. A full summary of this case has…
The Bulgarian Patent Office refused to issue a patent for an invention claimed as a medical use because the subject matter constituted a method for treatment of the human body and therefore it was unpatentable under Art. 7(2) of the Bulgarian Patents and Utility Models Registration Act (“PUMRA”). The decision of the Patent Office was…
The Bulgarian Patent Office refused to issue a supplementary protection certificate for a medical product comprising three components as one of them was not within the scope of protection of the basic patent. The decision of the Patent Office was first annulled by the first instance court but subsequently upheld by the Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court….
AstraZeneca filed a request with the Patent Office (PO) for the publication in the PO’s official bullet of a court judgment invalidating a previous PO’s decision regarding the termination of one of AstraZeneca’s patents. The PO denied AstraZeneca’s request for publication due to a pending procedure for the issuance of a supplementary protection certificate (SPC)…
The Supreme Administrative Court –overruled the Patent Office (PO) denying AstraZeneca’s application for a supplementary protection certificate (SPC), because the PO should have applied § 77(2) – instead of §79 – of the Transitional and Closing Provisions of the Act amending the Bulgarian Patents Act, which does not contains any requirements relating to the product’s…
Vitreo’s patent application for ‘means for application of a vitreous body for the purposes of prevention and medical treatment of ophthalmic disorders’ was denied by the patent office, because the claimed invention was considered to be excluded from patentability both as a method for medical treatment of human beings or animals through therapy or surgery…
Atanas filed a patent application for a ‘Gravity Power System’. The Bulgarian Patent Office (BPO) dismissed the application because the claimed invention was not industrially applicable and therefore not patentable as the system’s principle of functioning was contrary to the law of energy conservation, i.e. the system would always need an external force in order…
The Bulgarian Patent Office (BPO) revoked patent BG 61365 and published an announcement of the revocation in its official bulletin. The revocation was appealed by AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LR. The Court held the decision of the BPO invalid and annulled it as the decision was not in written form and the mere publication in the official…
Mr Yanko Tsv. A. filed an application with the Bulgarian Patent Office (BPO) for the grant of a patent for an ‘Active solar heating system’. The BPO dismissed the application as the Expert Department of ‘Mechanical Engineering, Construction, Electronics and Electronical Engineering’ determined that the invention applied for was not industrially applicable and therefore not…
