The Enlarged Board of Appeal answered the question referred to it by the Board of Appeal in J 2/08. The Enlarged Board of Appeal held that after a decision to refuse a European patent application, the application remains pending, in the sense that a divisional application can be validly filed, until the expiry of the…
European patent practitioners are welcoming the news that the EPO Administrative Council reached a decision on 26 October 2010 to extend the period for responding to a communication under Rule 161 EPC from one month to six months as of 1 May 2011. Since 1 April 2010, practitioners have been put under considerable pressure as…
In Grimme Landmaschinenfabrik GmbH v Scott [2010] EWCA Civ 1110 the English Court of Appeal stated clearly its support for judicial collaboration facilitating de facto harmonisation of patent law in Europe. The Court then interpreted the UK provisions on indirect/contributory infringement consistently with approaches taken in The Netherlands and Germany. The case in question concerned…
In decision G2/08, available on the EPO website, the Enlarged Board of Appeal provides a problem in relation to the Swiss type claims. It announces the abolition of the use of these claims in point 7.1.4 of the Reasons: “In order to ensure legal certainty and to protect legitimate interests of applicants, the abolition of…
When challenging the validity of a patent, a decision needs to be made early on as to grounds on which to rely. When it comes to allegations of anticipation and obviousness, the challenger and its advisers will need to consider whether to rely or just one or two prior art citations or to include a…
In the 30 June 2010 decision, the Cour d’Appel of Paris stated how the novelty of an invention, namely a pharmaceutical compound having a high degree of purity, should be assessed.
By 24 similar decisions rendered on 14 April 2010, the Cour d’Appel of Paris held that new Article L. 614-7 of the French Intellectual Property Code, implementing the London Agreement, applies not only to European patents in respect of which the mention of grant had been published after 1 May 2008 but also to European patents in respect of which the mention of grant had been published before 1 May 2008. One of these decisions is here summarized.
The Danish Supreme Court dismissed Meyn’s claim against Linco and declared Meyn’s patent invalid.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) has been asked to consider whether the draft agreement for the proposed European Patent Litigation System is compatible with the European Union treaties. On 2 July 2010, Advocate General Kokott provided an opinion (which has only recently been made publicly available) advising the CJEU to find…
The entry into force of the EPC 2000 on 13 December 2007 presented, for the first time in Spain, the possibility of amending claims in legal proceedings followed before national Courts where the validity of the patent has been questioned. This has sparked debate as to whether the application of article 138 will require the…
