The European Patent Office (EPO) is an organ of the European Patent Organisation, an intergovernmental organisation that was set up on 7 October 1977 on the basis of the European Patent Convention (EPC) signed in Munich in 1973. The EPO is responsible for the uniform procedure to grant European patents. Once the EPO has granted a European patent, the patent holder can validate it in every single contracting state. In the future, the EPO will also be in charge of deciding on requests for unitary effect of European patents under the Unitary Patent system.
By Klemens Stratmann Currently, the parties involved in appeal proceedings before the EPO see a clear trend towards decisions rendered on formal grounds. If the patentee files new requests along with the statement setting out the grounds of appeal without sufficiently addressing the decision per se, he runs the risk that the appeal is held…
The 23rd edition of the book The Annotated European Patent Convention has been published. The book is updated till 15 November 2015. Some important amendments in this new work: Recently issued Enlarged Board of Appeal decisions: -G1/12: correction of the identity of the appellant is allowed; -G1/13: the EPO recognises the retroactive effect of restoration…
Early January people often reflect on the past year. A good moment to give you an overview of the 10 most popular posts on the Kluwer Patent Blog in 2015. Going through the list, it is immediately clear our readers are closely following the developments and conflicts at the European Patent Office. The top two…
by Dominic Adair Post-grant opposition of patents is clearly a dangerous business. On opening the final panel session in the programme for AIPPI’s 2015 World Congress in Rio – titled “post-grant oppositions: a game changer?” – moderator Márcio Merckl from Abreu, Merkl e Advogados Associados in Brazil provided the dramatic news that not one but…
Since 2011, it has been clear in France that the possibility for patent owners to request before the French patent office a limitation of the claims of a granted patent, offered by article L. 613 24 of the French Intellectual Property Code (“IPC”) since 1 January 2009, applies not only to the claims of French patents but also…
Myles Jelf (Bristows LLP) talks about the difficulty with software patents. The difficulty arises from a need to identify the dividing line between the pure algorithm which should not be patentable and a technical invention which happens to use a computer. There are three different definitions between the UK, EPO and theUS. The EPC Article…
In a recent decision rendered by the Danish specialty court for patents (the Maritime & Commercial Court) it was decided to grant an injunction against sales of copies of a Bodum piston coffee maker. This case concerned whether F & H A/S should be barred from selling a specific piston coffee maker and whether sales…
As readers well know, over the years many patent offices around the world have opened the door to the patentability of so-called “second medical uses” to foster research on possible solutions to unmet medical needs based on the use of already known compounds. Although the most developed patent offices such as the European Patent Office…
In IPCom GmbH & Co KG v HTC Europe Co Limited and others [2013] EWCA Civ 1496, the English Court of Appeal has very recently given guidance concerning the circumstances in which it is appropriate for an English court considering combined patent infringement and revocation proceedings to stay those proceedings pending the outcome of co-pending…
According to a recent decision of the Administrative Council, from November 2014 it will be possible, by paying appropriate further search fees, to obtain searches of any claimed invention when entering the EPO Regional phase with a PCT application, regardless of which Searching Authority handled the application in the International phase. It will thus be…
