The question of whether or not a claim in a patent deriving from a divisional application covering or embracing something which was not specifically disclosed in the parent application, is not the proper standard for determining whether there has been an inadmissible extension of subject-matter. Although broadening of individual features is not prohibited by Art….
The Enlarged Board confirmed that a Technical Board of Appeal may refuse a request that is filed with the grounds of opposition if – upon request by the opposition division – the applicant has declined to file such a request during first instance proceedings and there is no reason why such request could not have…
The recent judgment from the ECJ of 24 November 2011 in case C-322/10 (“Medeva”) has surprised the patent community, since the ECJ appears to have changed the view expressed in its judgment of 16 September of 1999 in case C-392/97 (“Farmitalia”), where the Court declared that it was not for the ECJ, but for national…
The English High Court has recently ruled on the appropriateness of staying validity and infringement proceedings pending a Technical Board of Appeal (“TBA”) decision of the European Patent Office (“EPO”), and on using disclosed documents in parallel foreign proceedings. The parties involved have had a number of skirmishes recently in various courts throughout the world….
As stated already in one my earlier posts (here), Legislative Decree no. 131/2010 has introduced a new procedural tool in the Italian IP litigation scenario. New Art. 128 of the Italian IP Code now allows the conduction of a Preliminary Technical Assessment (PTA). In practice, as an alternative to commencing ordinary proceedings or preliminary injunction…
by Bernward Zollner rospatt osten pross In two decisions of May and September 2011 the Appeal Court Düsseldorf had to comment on various issues concerning the accounting and determination of patent infringer’s profit. In the decision of May 2011 it is stated that an obligation of defend-ant to amend or specify an accounting cannot be…
As per January 1, 2012 the Swiss Federal Patent Court became effective. The Federal Patent Court is exclusively competent for: a. validity and infringement disputes and actions for issuing a license in respect of patents; b. ordering preliminary measures prior to the filing of a complaint as defined in letter a; c. the enforcement of…
Among many other tasks, the Danish Government when taking over the EU Presidency as of 1 January took over the continued challenges (and problems) in connection with securing a compromise that may lead to a Unified Patent Court. Despite the intentions of the Polish presidency to land a compromise during its tenure, the issue remains…
The general rule in UK litigation is that the successful party is entitled to its costs. One exception to this rule, peculiar to patent cases, is a so-called ‘Earth Closet’ order. If an alleged infringer introduces a new piece of prior art, after service of its original Grounds of Invalidity, an Earth Closet order enables…
The Court of Justice clarified the requirements for grant of an SPC under Articles 3(a) and 3(b) of the SPC Regulation. According to the Court, on the basis of Article 3(a) an SPC cannot be granted for active ingredients not specified in the wording of the claims of the basic patent. With reference to Article…
