Denmark Danemark Dänemark. Report Q193. in the name of the Danish Group by Ejvind CHRISTIANSEN, Torsten NØRGAARD and Holm SCHWARZE

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Denmark Danemark Dänemark. Report Q193. in the name of the Danish Group by Ejvind CHRISTIANSEN, Torsten NØRGAARD and Holm SCHWARZE"

Transcription

1 Denmark Danemark Dänemark Report Q193 in the name of the Danish Group by Ejvind CHRISTIANSEN, Torsten NØRGAARD and Holm SCHWARZE Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I) Analysis of the current law 1) Are divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications, respectively, available under your national or regional law? In Denmark it is possible to file divisional applications in respect of an invention disclosed in a parent application for which a final decision has not yet been issued. Danish law does not provide for continuation or continuation in part applications as such. However, in addition to filing divisional applications, though rarely used, Danish law provides the possibility of filing a so called separated ( udskilt ) application. Such a separated application may be filed in respect of subject matter which was disclosed in the parent application at the time of filing the separated application but not included in the parent application as filed, e.g. subject matter which was disclosed in a subsequently filed document during the prosecution of the parent application. Upon request, the separated application is deemed to be filed on the date on which the documents disclosing the subject matter of the separated application were filed with the Danish patent office and, consequently, such a separated application is not entitled to the earliest priority of the application from which is originates. Since Denmark, like the EPO and most European Countries provides for filing applications with internal priority, such later applications containing added subject matter would in principle be tantamount to continuation in part applications with partial priority. In practice, however such applications would to day normally be filed as EP or PCT applications designating DK. Denmark is a contracting state of the European Patent Convention. Consequently, divisional applications of European patent applications are also available in respect of Denmark as a designated contracting state. Finally, as a yet further possibility of obtaining separate protection for an invention disclosed in a patent application, an applicant may branch out a Danish utility model from a Danish patent application, a European patent application or a PCT patent application designating Denmark. 2) What is the justification behind allowing the filing of divisional, continuation and continuation in part applications in your law? While commentators highlight situations where an application relates to more than one non unitary inventions as a typical example of the filing of divisional applications, the availability of divisional applications under Danish law is not restricted to this situation. In particular, an applicant may, if he/she so wishes for whatever reason, file a divisional application in respect of an invention which is dependent on the invention sought protected in the parent application or for one of several unitary inventions disclosed in the parent application. 1

2 Furthermore, as regards separated applications, an applicant may file a separated application in respect of newly introduced subject matter which is not entitled to the filing date of the parent application, while the parent application may remain limited to the original subject matter and retain its original filing date. 3) Under what circumstances and conditions may divisional, continuation and continuation in part applications (or combinations thereof) be filed in your national or regional patent system? The conditions for filing divisional and separated applications include the following in particular: The subject matter of a divisional application may not go beyond the content of the parent application. In contrast, the subject matter of a Danish separated application must have been introduced into the parent application at some point during the prosecution of the parent application. The content of a divisional application, on the other hand, must have been included in the parent application as from the date of filing. A divisional or separated application may be filed as long as a final decision has not yet been issued in respect of the parent application. A divisional or separated application has to be identified as such upon filing, and the parent application has to be identified in the application. Moreover, the applicant has to identify which parts of the parent application the claims of the divisional application are based on. The applicant also has to indicate in the parent application that a divisional or separated application has been filed. 4) Are cascades of divisional, continuation and continuation in part applications allowed, i.e. is it possible to file a divisional, continuation or continuation in part application on the basis of another divisional, continuation or continuation in part application? There is no provision in the Danish law that would prevent filing a divisional application from another divisional application. 5) At what time during the prosecution of the parent application may divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications be filed? Generally, a divisional or separated application may be filed at any time as long as no final decision has been issued in respect of the parent application. 6) Is it a requirement for filing an application that is a divisional, continuation or continuation in part of an original application (or of another divisional, continuation or continuation in part thereof) that the original application (or the direct parent application, or both) is still pending at the time of filing of the divisional, continuation or continuation in part application? A divisional or separated application may be filed at any time as long as no final decision has been reached on the parent application, i.e. as long as the parent application has not yet been finally refused, been withdrawn, deemed withdrawn, or granted. In case of a refusal of the parent application, a divisional may still be filed during the time limit for filing an appeal against the decision to refuse. In case of a patent application being deemed withdrawn for failure to respond to an office action, a divisional application may still be filed during the time limit for revival of the parent application. According to Danish law, once the patent office has examined the patent application and when the patent application fulfils the requirements of the Danish patent law, the patent office notifies the applicant that it intends to grant the patent. After this notification, the claims of the patent application may no longer be amended so as to broaden the scope of protection. Similarly, a divisional application filed after the above notification has been issued in respect of the parent application may not relate to subject matter that at the time of filing of the divisional application could no longer have been included in the claims of the parent application. 2

3 7) Is it a requirement that the original application (or the direct parent application, or both) is still pending throughout the prosecution of a divisional, continuation or continuation in part application derived therefrom? There is no such provision under Danish law. 8) Are there any restrictions as to what may be included in a divisional, continuation or continuation in part application? The subject matter of a divisional or separated application may not go beyond the content of the parent application. In particular, a divisional application, which is deemed filed on the date of filing of the parent application, may only be filed in respect of subject matter which was disclosed in the application documents on the date of filing of the parent application. 9) In particular, may the description and/or claims contain or claim matter that was not contained or claimed in the original application, or other application from which the divisional, continuation or continuation in part application derives? Under Danish law, it is not required that the subject matter of a divisional application was actually claimed in the parent application. However, a divisional application may only relate to subject matter disclosed in the parent application as filed. Furthermore, a divisional or separated application may only relate to subject matter that could have been introduced in the claims of the parent application at the time of the filing of the divisional application. 10) Is it possible to extend the patent term in respect of matter contained in the original application by filing divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications, including divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications containing added matter, to the extent the addition of new matter is allowed? Since a divisional application is deemed filed on the filing date of the parent application, no extension of the term of the patent is achieved. However, filing of a separated application for subject matter introduced during prosecution of the parent application, the separated application is deemed filed on the date of filing of the newly introduced subject matter in the parent application. Consequently, the term of the separated application is extended compared to the parent application. 11) Is double patenting permitted or must the matter claimed in divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications be deleted from the claims of the original application, or other application from which the divisional, continuation or continuation in part application derives? There is no provision in the Danish patent law that requires deletion of the subject matter sought protected in the divisional application from the parent application, except in cases of lack of unity. Double patenting is not explicitly prohibited by Danish law. 12) Does it matter in this respect whether the divisional, continuation or continuation in part application was filed in response to a restriction requirement issued by the patent granting authority? If a divisional application was filed in response to a restriction requirement, i.e. in cases where the parent application relates to more than one non unitary inventions, the applicant had to limit the claims of the parent application to a single inventive concept in the parent application irrespective of whether he/she files a divisional application. The applicant may further be required to remove any part of the description of the parent application that does not contribute to the understanding of the invention sough protected in the parent application. 3

4 II) Proposals for adoption of uniform rules 1) In the opinion of your National or Regional Group, what are the advantages, for applicants and third parties, of allowing the filing of divisional, continuation or continuation in part patent applications? If a parent application discloses more than one invention such that the requirements of unity of invention is not fulfilled, the possibility of filing a divisional may be the only way for an applicant to obtain protection for all the inventions disclosed in the parent application. Furthermore, irrespective of the question of unity, an applicant may have a legitimate interest of making one or more aspects or embodiments of an application subject of a separate application. For example, such separate protection may be useful in connection with an assignment or licensing of an aspect or embodiment of an invention. 2) In the opinion of your National or Regional Group, what are the disadvantages, for applicants and third parties, of allowing the filing of divisional, continuation or continuation in part patent applications? For third parties, the possibility of filing divisional applications, continuation applications and continuation in part applications increases the burden of evaluating possible infringement risks in relation to pending patent applications, since not only the claimed invention of the application under consideration may have to be analysed but also possible further and even non unitary inventions that may be disclosed but not claimed in the patent application under consideration. 3) In the opinion of your National or Regional Group, should the filing of divisional, continuation or continuation in part patent applications, respectively, be permissible? A patent system should provide a fair balance between the interests of applicants for and proprietors of patents, on one hand, and the interests of third parties, on the other hand. As divisional applications may be the only way for applicants to obtain patent protection for an invention, it is the opinion of the Danish Group that on balancing the above advantages and disadvantages divisional applications should be permissible. The Danish Group is of the opinion that the patent laws and practice should, as much as practically possible, prevent the filing of continuation applications (which, according to the definition put forward, relates to the same invention as claimed in a prior application ). It puts a big burden on third parties if filing of such continuation applications is permitted. Of course, if the applicant is not satisfied with a rejection, he has the possibility of filing an appeal. Generally, the Danish Group is of the opinion that it should not be permissible to file continuation in part applications outside the window of internal priority. It is our opinion that continuation in part applications (like separated ( udskilte ) applications according to the present Danish law) are to a large extent used to cure procedural faults made by patent applicants and attorneys and this possibility highly favours applicants and put an unreasonable burden on third parties, for example, in connection with Freedom of Operation analyses. Some US attorneys say that, in general, in the US, continuation in part applications are over used (and poorly understood) and as a result of this, it sometimes results in that the corresponding non US applications becomes invalid in countries which do not accept the continuation in part concept and/or because of an invalid priority claim. 4

5 4) If international harmonisation were to be achieved in respect of the rules governing divisional or continuation patent applications, what should be the common rules in respect of the circumstances and conditions in which divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications may be filed? The Danish Group is of the opinion that the filing of divisional applications should only be permissible if it is divided from a pending application. The Danish Group is against a limitation to only, say, 2 nd or 3 rd generation divisionals and, consequently, we accept the possibility of cascading divisional applications. Furthermore, we do not think it should be a prerequisite that the basic (original or parent) application is still pending when any divisional application in the cascade of applications is filed. A third party always has the possibility of judging which inventions are described in a patent application and a watch will show when applications on the various aspects are filed. However, it appears to be a practical problem that the question of new matter is judged differently in different countries in that, for example, the EPO appears to be stricter than USPTO and the USPTO appears to favour applicants too much, compared with third parties. Furthermore, filing a 2 nd generation divisional may be the only possibility for an applicant to obtain protection for an invention in case the patent office raises a new unity objection for the first time in respect of the 1 st generation divisional application. 5) In particular, should a harmonised system permit the addition in a divisional, continuation or continuation in part application of matter that was not contained in the original application as filed? Divisional applications should only be entitled to the filing date of the parent application, if their content does not go beyond the subject matter that is sufficiently disclosed in the parent application. 6) Should it be permitted to use a divisional, continuation or continuation in part patent application to obtain new examination and decision of an application that contains claims that are identical or essentially identical with claims finally rejected in the course of the prosecution of the parent application? Should there be an exception where case law on the substantive conditions for patent grant of the patent granting authority has changed since the parent application was rejected? Would this possibility adequately take into account the interests of third parties in legal certainty? As appears indirectly from our answer above to item 3, our answer to these three sub questions are no, no and yes, respectively. 7) Should it be possible to extend the patent term in respect of matter contained in the original application by filing divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications, including divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications containing added matter? The Danish Group is of the opinion that it should not be permitted to add new matter. 8) In the opinion of your Group, would it be justified to limit the access to filing divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications primarily with the object of limiting the backlog of patent granting authorities? The Danish Group is concerned about any undesired and inconvenient backlog, but limitation of applicant s rights to obtain protection for all their inventions is not the right remedy. In connection with any backlog, it is important that both applicants and third parties can request that specific applications are prosecuted fast and that the Patent Offices effect this efficiently. 5

6 9) In the opinion of your Group, would it be desirable, in the interest of legal certainty of third parties, if databases of patent granting authorities ensured that a clear link was always indicated between original patent applications and all divisional, continuation or continuation in part applications derived therefrom? Yes, this would increase usability of such databases, and it would increase legal certainty for third parties and reduce the burden of analysing potential infringement risks. National and Regional Groups are invited to make any additional comment concerning divisional, continuation and continuation in part applications which they find relevant. Summary The Danish Group refers to the rules in the Danish Patents Act in accordance with which divisional applications may be filed in respect of an invention disclosed in a parent application for which a final decision has not yet been issued. Danish law does not provide for continuation or continuation in part applications as such. However, in addition to filing divisional applications, though rarely used, Danish law provides the possibility of filing a so called separated ( udskilt ) application in respect of subject matter that was introduced into the files of a parent application during prosecution of the parent application. As far as harmonization is concerned, the Danish Group is of the opinion that there is no need for continuation applications and continuation in part applications, while the Danish Group is in favour of maintaining the possibility of filing divisional applications without undue restrictions. Résumé Le groupe danois se réfère au règlement en vertu de la législation danoise relatif aux brevets suivant laquelle les demandes divisionnaires peuvent être déposées dans le domaine d une invention décrite dans une demande parente pour laquelle il s applique qu une décision finale n est pas encore issue. La législation danoise ne prévoit pas le dépôt des demandes de brevet sous forme de Continuation or Continuation in Part Applications en soi. Cependant, en outre du dépôt des applications divisionnaires, bien que rarement utilisé, la législation danoise permet le dépôt d une demande soi disant séparée ( udskilt ) en vertu des biens sujets introduits dans les dossiers d une demande parente lors de la poursuite de la demande parente. En ce qui concerne harmonisation, le groupe danois est d avis qu il n y a pas besoin des demandes de brevet sous forme de Continuation or Continuation in Part Applications, tandis que le groupe danois favorise le maintien de la possibilité de déposer les demandes divisionnaires sans restrictions indues. Zusammenfassung Die dänische Gruppe bezieht sich auf die Regeln des Dänischen Patentgesetzes in Übereinstimmung mit welchen Teilanmeldungen in Bezug auf Erfindungen, die in einer früheren Anmeldung, für die noch keine endgültige Entscheidung ergangen ist, eingereicht werden können. Das dänische Recht sieht keine continuation und continuation in part Anmeldungen als solche vor. Allerdings erlaubt das dänische Recht die wenn auch selten benutzte Möglichkeit vor, eine so genannte ausgegliederte ( udskilt ) Anmeldung in Bezug auf Gegenstände, die während der Behandlung der früheren Anmeldung zu den Akten der früheren Anmeldung hinzugefügt wurde, einzureichen. In Bezug auf eine Harmonisierung ist die dänische Gruppe der Auffassung, dass für continuation und continuation in part Anmeldungen kein Bedarf besteht, während die dänische Gruppe die Beibehaltung der Möglichkeit, Teilanmeldungen ohne unnötige Beschränkungen einzureichen, befürwortet. 6

Switzerland Suisse Schweiz. Report Q193

Switzerland Suisse Schweiz. Report Q193 Switzerland Suisse Schweiz Report Q193 in the name of the Swiss Group by Andrea CARREIRA, Jan D HAEMER, Andri HESS, Paul PLISKA, Michael STÖRZBACH and Marco ZARDI Divisional, Continuation and Continuation

More information

Argentina Argentine Argentinien. Report Q193. in the name of the Argentinian Group

Argentina Argentine Argentinien. Report Q193. in the name of the Argentinian Group Argentina Argentine Argentinien Report Q193 in the name of the Argentinian Group Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I) Analysis of the current law 1) Are divisional,

More information

Poland Pologne Polen. Report Q193. in the name of the Polish Group by Agnieszka JAKOBSCHE and Katarzyna KARCZ

Poland Pologne Polen. Report Q193. in the name of the Polish Group by Agnieszka JAKOBSCHE and Katarzyna KARCZ Poland Pologne Polen Report Q193 in the name of the Polish Group by Agnieszka JAKOBSCHE and Katarzyna KARCZ Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I) Analysis of

More information

Belgium Belgique Belgien. Report Q193. in the name of the Belgian Group by Nele D HALLEWEYN

Belgium Belgique Belgien. Report Q193. in the name of the Belgian Group by Nele D HALLEWEYN Belgium Belgique Belgien Report Q193 in the name of the Belgian Group by Nele D HALLEWEYN Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Preliminary comments The answers to Q193

More information

Divisional, Continuation and Continuation-in-Part Applications (Q 193)

Divisional, Continuation and Continuation-in-Part Applications (Q 193) Die Seite der AIPPI / La page de l AIPPI Divisional, Continuation and Continuation-in-Part Applications (Q 193) REPORT OF SWISS GROUP * Die Schweizer Gruppe sieht mehrere Vorteile für den Anmelder und

More information

Canada Canada Kanada. Report Q193. in the name of the Canadian Group by France COTE, Alfred A. MACCHIONE and Michel SOFIA

Canada Canada Kanada. Report Q193. in the name of the Canadian Group by France COTE, Alfred A. MACCHIONE and Michel SOFIA Canada Canada Kanada Report Q193 in the name of the Canadian Group by France COTE, Alfred A. MACCHIONE and Michel SOFIA Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I)

More information

Inventorship of Multinational Inventions (Q 244)

Inventorship of Multinational Inventions (Q 244) Die Seite der AIPPI La page de l AIPPI Inventorship of Multinational Inventions (Q 244) REPORT OF SWISS GROUP * Questions I. Current law and practice 1. Please describe your law defining inventorship and

More information

New Zealand Nouvelle-Zélande Neuseeland. Report Q193. in the name of the New Zealand Group by Tim JACKSON

New Zealand Nouvelle-Zélande Neuseeland. Report Q193. in the name of the New Zealand Group by Tim JACKSON New Zealand Nouvelle-Zélande Neuseeland Report Q193 in the name of the New Zealand Group by Tim JACKSON Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Questions I) Analysis of the

More information

Denmark Danemark Dänemark. Report Q192. in the name of the Danish Group by Dorte WAHL and Martin Sick NIELSEN

Denmark Danemark Dänemark. Report Q192. in the name of the Danish Group by Dorte WAHL and Martin Sick NIELSEN Denmark Danemark Dänemark Report Q192 in the name of the Danish Group by Dorte WAHL and Martin Sick NIELSEN Acquiescence (tolerance) to infringement of Intellectual Property Rights Questions 1) The Groups

More information

No. According to the PTO s internal examination guidelines, second medical use claims are not patentable.

No. According to the PTO s internal examination guidelines, second medical use claims are not patentable. Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: Argentina Second medical use or indication claims Gastón RICHELET, Ricardo D. RICHELET Gastón RICHELET Date: May 19,

More information

Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande. Report Q193. in the name of the Dutch Group by Lars DE HAAS, Addick LAND, Hans PRINS and Marc VAN WIJNGAARDEN

Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande. Report Q193. in the name of the Dutch Group by Lars DE HAAS, Addick LAND, Hans PRINS and Marc VAN WIJNGAARDEN Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande Report Q193 in the name of the Dutch Group by Lars DE HAAS, Addick LAND, Hans PRINS and Marc VAN WIJNGAARDEN Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications

More information

Hungary Hongrie Ungarn. Report Q204

Hungary Hongrie Ungarn. Report Q204 Hungary Hongrie Ungarn Report Q204 in the name of the Hungarian Group by Marcell KERESZTY, András ANTALFFY-ZSÍROS, Judit KERÉNY, Katalin MÉSZÁROS, Imre MOLNÁR, Tivadar PALÁGYI and Zsolt SZENTPÉTERI Liability

More information

Japan Japon Japan. Report Q189. in the name of the Japanese Group

Japan Japon Japan. Report Q189. in the name of the Japanese Group Japan Japon Japan Report Q189 in the name of the Japanese Group Amendment of patent claims after grant (in court and administrative proceedings, including re examination proceedings requested by third

More information

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Question Q204P National Group: AIPPI PANAMA GROUP Title: Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Contributors: Julie Martinelli Representative within Working

More information

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Question Q204P National Group: The Danish Group Title: Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Contributors: Sture Rygaard, Anders Valentin, Emil Jurcenoks,

More information

Poland Pologne Polen. Report Q205. in the name of the Polish Group by Katarzyna KARCZ, Jaromir PIWOWAR, Tomasz RYCHLICKI

Poland Pologne Polen. Report Q205. in the name of the Polish Group by Katarzyna KARCZ, Jaromir PIWOWAR, Tomasz RYCHLICKI Poland Pologne Polen Report Q205 in the name of the Polish Group by Katarzyna KARCZ, Jaromir PIWOWAR, Tomasz RYCHLICKI Exhaustion of IPRs in cases of recycling and repair of goods Questions I) Analysis

More information

Working Guidelines. Question Q193. Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications

Working Guidelines. Question Q193. Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Working Guidelines by Jochen E. BÜHLING, Reporter General Dariusz SZLEPER and Thierry CALAME, Deputy Reporters General Nicolai LINDGREEN, Nicola DAGG and Shoichi OKUYAMA Assistants to the Reporter General

More information

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Question Q229 National Group: Hungary Title: The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Contributors: Dr. Marcell KERESZTY (Head of the Working Committee), Dr. Daisy MACHYTKA-FRANK,

More information

United Kingdom Royaume Uni Vereinigtes Königreich. Report Q193

United Kingdom Royaume Uni Vereinigtes Königreich. Report Q193 United Kingdom Royaume Uni Vereinigtes Königreich Report Q193 in the name of the United Kingdom Group by Geoffrey BAYLISS, Graham BOON, Duncan WHITE, Ian LOVELESS, David HARRISON, David JACOBSEN, Sebastian

More information

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Question Q229 National Group: Denmark/Dänemark/Danemark Title: The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Contributors: Ulla KLINGE, Peter-Ulrik PLESNER, Mikkel VITTRUP, Jakob KRAG

More information

The Rule 164 Problem. Non unity objections as made by the EPO, and potential remedies. Presentation at VPP Bezirksgruppenveranstaltung April 28, 2010

The Rule 164 Problem. Non unity objections as made by the EPO, and potential remedies. Presentation at VPP Bezirksgruppenveranstaltung April 28, 2010 The Rule 164 Problem Non unity objections as made by the EPO, and potential remedies Presentation at VPP Bezirksgruppenveranstaltung April 28, 2010 Dipl. Ing. Andreas Gröschel Dr. Ulrich Storz M I C H

More information

Second medical use or indication claims

Second medical use or indication claims Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: AUSTRIA Second medical use or indication claims Marc KESCHMANN Marc KESCHMANN Date: May 12, 2014 Questions I. Current

More information

The availability of injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs

The availability of injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs Question Q219 National Group: Austria Title: The availability of injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: Peter Pawloy, Christian Gassauer-Fleissner

More information

South Africa Afrique du Sud Südafrika. Report Q189. in the name of the South African Group by Hans H. HAHN, Janusz LUTEREK and HUGH MOUBRAY

South Africa Afrique du Sud Südafrika. Report Q189. in the name of the South African Group by Hans H. HAHN, Janusz LUTEREK and HUGH MOUBRAY South Africa Afrique du Sud Südafrika Report Q189 in the name of the South African Group by Hans H. HAHN, Janusz LUTEREK and HUGH MOUBRAY Amendment of patent claims after grant (in court and administrative

More information

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement

Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Question Q204P National Group: Sweden Title: Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Contributors: Mathilda ANDERSSON, Erik FICKS, Dag HEDEFÄLT and Martin

More information

R 84a EPC does not apply to filing date itself as was no due date missed. So, effective date for and contacts subject matter is

R 84a EPC does not apply to filing date itself as was no due date missed. So, effective date for and contacts subject matter is Candidate s Answer DII 1. HVHF plugs + PP has: US2 - granted in US (related to US 1) EP1 - pending before EPO + + for all states LBP has: FR1 - France - still pending? EP2 - granted for DE, ES, FR, GB

More information

Japan Japon Japan. Report Q194. in the name of the Japanese Group by Eiichiro KUBOTA

Japan Japon Japan. Report Q194. in the name of the Japanese Group by Eiichiro KUBOTA Japan Japon Japan Report Q194 in the name of the Japanese Group by Eiichiro KUBOTA The Impact of Co Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights on their Exploitation Questions I) The current substantive

More information

BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, AND THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS

BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, AND THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS [Abstract prepared by the PCT Legal Division (PCT-2018-0002)] Case Name: BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, AND THE COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS Jurisdiction: FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL (CANADA)

More information

SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PCT Applicant s Guide National Phase National Chapter Page 1 SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS DESIGNATED (OR ELECTED) OFFICE CONTENTS THE ENTRY INTO THE NATIONAL PHASE SUMMARY THE PROCEDURE

More information

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings

The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings SPAIN Question Q229 Title: Spanish Group: The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Antonio Castán (President) Alicia Arroyo Isidro José García Egea Patricia Koch Jorge Llevat Manuel

More information

Canada Canada Kanada. Report Q187. in the name of the Canadian Group by Steven B. GARLAND (Chairman) and Colin INGRAM

Canada Canada Kanada. Report Q187. in the name of the Canadian Group by Steven B. GARLAND (Chairman) and Colin INGRAM Canada Canada Kanada Report Q187 in the name of the Canadian Group by Steven B. GARLAND (Chairman) and Colin INGRAM Limitations on exclusive IP Rights by competition law Questions I) STATE OF THE SUBSTANTIVE

More information

The patentability criteria for inventive step / non-obviousness

The patentability criteria for inventive step / non-obviousness Question Q217 National Group: Title: Sweden/Suède/Schweden The patentability criteria for inventive step / non-obviousness Contributors: Lars BJÖRKLUND, Magnus DAHLMAN, Heléne ELIASSON, Kristian FREDRIKSON,

More information

Injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs

Injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs Question Q219 National Group: Hungary Title: Injunctions in cases of infringement of IPRs Contributors: Dr. Gusztáv Bacher, Dr. Gábor Faludi, Dr. Katalin Horváth, Dr. Zsófia Klauber, Imre Molnár, János

More information

Sweden Suède Schweden. Report Q202

Sweden Suède Schweden. Report Q202 Sweden Suède Schweden Report Q202 in the name of the Swedish Group by Fredrik CARLSSON, Ivan HJERTMAN, Bo JOHANSSON, Birgitta LARSSON, Hampus RYSTEDT, Louise WALLIN, Claudia WALLMAN and Johan ÖBERG The

More information

Attachment: Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China

Attachment: Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China March 31, 2009 To: Legislative Affairs Office State Council People s Republic of China Hirohiko Usui President Japan Intellectual Property Association Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing

More information

Patents: Utility Models Overview of requirements, procedures and tactical use in Europe and Japan

Patents: Utility Models Overview of requirements, procedures and tactical use in Europe and Japan Murgitroyd and Sonoda & Kobayashi present Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Contact Patents: Utility Models Overview of requirements, procedures and tactical use in Europe and Japan Dr.sc. Robert Börner

More information

Double Patenting at the EPO

Double Patenting at the EPO Double Patenting at the EPO I. Summary Recent case law confirms that patents granted on parent and divisional applications cannot contain claims of identical scope, and potentially restricts the ability

More information

Candidate's Answer - DI

Candidate's Answer - DI Candidate's Answer - DI Candidate's Answer - DI Question 1 Deadline for entering European Regional Phase = 31 m from filing date or priority date if priority is claimed (Art 39(1)(b) PCT, R107 EPC). No

More information

ABPI Associação Brasileira da Propriedade Intelectual (Brazil) Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement

ABPI Associação Brasileira da Propriedade Intelectual (Brazil) Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Question Q204P National Group: ABPI Associação Brasileira da Propriedade Intelectual (Brazil) Title: Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Contributors:

More information

IP LAW HARMONISATION: BEYOND THE STATUTE

IP LAW HARMONISATION: BEYOND THE STATUTE IP LAW HARMONISATION: BEYOND THE STATUTE Harmonisation of the statutes Harmonisation of Patent Office practice Harmonisation of Court practice Dealing with increasing workloads Tony Maschio & John Lloyd

More information

1) Does your country have a registration system for IP licenses? If yes, please describe this system.

1) Does your country have a registration system for IP licenses? If yes, please describe this system. Question Q241 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: Hungary IP licensing and insolvency Dr. BACHER, Gusztáv, Dr. FALUDI, Gábor, Dr. LÁSZLÓ, Áron, Dr. LENDVAI, Zsófia,

More information

Cybercrime Convention Implementation into Swiss Law

Cybercrime Convention Implementation into Swiss Law 10.04.2009 1 Cybercrime Convention Implementation into Swiss Law From: Dr. Christa Stamm-Pfister, VISCHER For: SwiNOG-18, 2. April 2009, Bern 10.04.2009 2 Overview Cybercrime Convention Legislative Procedure

More information

The opposition procedure and limitation and revocation procedures

The opposition procedure and limitation and revocation procedures The opposition procedure and limitation and revocation procedures Closa Daniel Beaucé Gaëtan 26-30/11/2012 Contents Introduction Legal framework Procedure Intervention of the assumed infringer Observations

More information

Threats & Opportunities in Proceedings before the EPO with a brief update on the Unitary Patent

Threats & Opportunities in Proceedings before the EPO with a brief update on the Unitary Patent Threats & Opportunities in Proceedings before the EPO with a brief update on the Unitary Patent MassMEDIC Jens Viktor Nørgaard & Peter Borg Gaarde September 13, 2013 Agenda Meet the speakers Threats &

More information

Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Patent Examination

Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Patent Examination Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Patent Examination Lutz Mailänder Head, Patent Information Section Global IP Infrastructure Sector Bangkok 21-23 November 2012 Hanoi 26-28 November 2012 Agenda Challenges

More information

Spain Espagne Spanien. Report Q180

Spain Espagne Spanien. Report Q180 Spain Espagne Spanien Report Q180 in the name of the Spanish Group by David PELLISE (Chairman), Rafael CASTELLANOS, Josep M. CASTELLO, Eduard FERREGUELA, Isidro José GARCIA EGEA, Manuel ILLESCAS, Jorge

More information

Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond

Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond page 1 of 11 Prosecuting an Israel Patent Application and Beyond Updated July 2017 LIST OF CONTENTS 1. General Information (page 2) a. Language b. Conventions c. Obtaining a filing date and number d. Excess

More information

Minutes of SSP Minute du PPU

Minutes of SSP Minute du PPU Présence Attendance Date : 2013/05/08 See Attendance document Voir document de présence Sujets abordés Worked subjects Presentation : Stephen Woodley (see document in annexe A voir document en annexe A)

More information

Summary Report. Report Q189

Summary Report. Report Q189 Summary Report Report Q189 Amendment of patent claims after grant (in court and administrative proceedings, including re examination proceedings requested by third parties) The intention with Q189 was

More information

Restriction: Definition & Characteristics A tool used by the USPTO to limit the substantive examination of a patent application to a single invention

Restriction: Definition & Characteristics A tool used by the USPTO to limit the substantive examination of a patent application to a single invention Restriction & Double Patenting Mojdeh Bahar, J.D., M.A., CLP Chief, Cancer Branch Office of Technology Transfer National Institutes of Health U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Road Map Restriction

More information

Raising the Bar and EPC changes as from 1 April 2010

Raising the Bar and EPC changes as from 1 April 2010 Platform Formalities Officers 1 st Annual Formalities Officers Conference Rijswijk, 11 March 2010 Raising the Bar and EPC changes as from 1 April 2010 Luise Zimmermann European Patent Office Content Raising

More information

FRANCOPHONE EDUCATION AUTHORITIES REGULATION. Authority: School Act, s. 175

FRANCOPHONE EDUCATION AUTHORITIES REGULATION. Authority: School Act, s. 175 Authority: School Act, s. 175 B.C. Reg. 212/99... Effective July 9, 1999 Editorial Edits by Registrar of Regulations... Effective December 22, 1999 Amended by B.C. Reg. 277/02... Effective October 11,

More information

JETRO seminar. Recent Rule change and latest developments at the EPO:

JETRO seminar. Recent Rule change and latest developments at the EPO: JETRO seminar Recent Rule change and latest developments at the EPO: Alfred Spigarelli Director Patent procedures management DG1 Business services EPO Düsseldorf 4 November, 2010 Overview RAISING THE BAR

More information

Patents: opposition proceedings and nullity actions a comparison between Europe and Japan

Patents: opposition proceedings and nullity actions a comparison between Europe and Japan Murgitroyd and Sonoda & Kobayashi present Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Contact Patents: opposition proceedings and nullity actions a comparison between Europe and Japan Luca Escoffier Diane Beylier

More information

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS. Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN

PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS. Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT): BENEFITS AND STRATEGIES FOR APPLICANTS Seminar on WIPO Services and Initiatives Gary L. Montle Nashville, TN April 13, 2016 Topics for Discussion General considerations

More information

QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% six months after the publication of European search report

QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% six months after the publication of European search report QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FC3 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 59% Question 1 a) Deadline for validating granted European patent in EPC six months after the publication of European search report 0 b) i) Germany

More information

Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO. Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017

Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO. Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017 Managing costs and timeliness at EPO & UKIPO Mike Jennings A.A.Thornton & Co October 2017 Patent attorneys don t like: Excessive official fees such as EPO fees on entry to PCT regional phase may deter

More information

Changes regarding jurisdiction in European cross-border patent litigation cases by Johannes Wohlmuth

Changes regarding jurisdiction in European cross-border patent litigation cases by Johannes Wohlmuth Changes regarding jurisdiction in European cross-border patent litigation cases by Johannes Wohlmuth The European Union applies since 2015 a recast of Brussels I regulation and is in the process of creating

More information

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. Committee on Legal Affairs

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT. Committee on Legal Affairs EUROPEAN PARLIAMT 2004 Committee on Legal Affairs 2009 2008/0130(CNS) 9.9.2008 * DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation on the Statute for a European private company (COM(2008)0396 C6-0283/2008

More information

EGYPTIAN PATENT OFFICE

EGYPTIAN PATENT OFFICE PCT Applicant s Guide National Phase National Chapter EG Page 1 EGYPTIAN PATENT OFFICE AS DESIGNATED (OR ELECTED) OFFICE CONTENTS THE ENTRY INTO THE NATIONAL PHASE SUMMARY THE PROCEDURE IN THE NATIONAL

More information

SITUATION EN CÔTE D IVOIRE AFFAIRE LE PROCUREUR c. LAURENT GBAGBO ANNEXE 3 PUBLIQUE EXPURGÉE

SITUATION EN CÔTE D IVOIRE AFFAIRE LE PROCUREUR c. LAURENT GBAGBO ANNEXE 3 PUBLIQUE EXPURGÉE ICC-02/11-01/11-647-Anx3-Red 16-05-2014 1/9 NM PT SITUATION EN CÔTE D IVOIRE AFFAIRE LE PROCUREUR c. LAURENT GBAGBO ANNEXE 3 PUBLIQUE EXPURGÉE Tableau recensant les erreurs commises par la victimes lorsqu

More information

The Relevance of Traditional Knowledge to Intellectual Property Law. Katja GRABIENSKI, Martina SCHUSTER, THORSTEN BAUSCH, Jan DOMBROWSKI

The Relevance of Traditional Knowledge to Intellectual Property Law. Katja GRABIENSKI, Martina SCHUSTER, THORSTEN BAUSCH, Jan DOMBROWSKI Question Q232 National Group: German Group Title: The Relevance of Traditional Knowledge to Intellectual Property Law Contributors: Katja GRABIENSKI, Martina SCHUSTER, THORSTEN BAUSCH, Jan DOMBROWSKI Reporter

More information

AIPPI Study Question - Conflicting patent applications

AIPPI Study Question - Conflicting patent applications Study Question Submission date: April 30, 2018 Sarah MATHESON, Reporter General Jonathan P. OSHA and Anne Marie VERSCHUUR, Deputy Reporters General Yusuke INUI, Ari LAAKKONEN and Ralph NACK, Assistants

More information

Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics

Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics ETHI NUMBER 031 2nd SESSION 41st PARLIAMENT EVIDENCE Wednesday, February 4, 2015 Chair Mr. Pierre-Luc Dusseault 1 Standing Committee on

More information

The Saskatchewan Gazette PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY AUTHORITY OF THE QUEEN S PRINTER/PUBLIÉE CHAQUE SEMAINE SOUS L AUTORITÉ DE L IMPRIMEUR DE LA REINE

The Saskatchewan Gazette PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY AUTHORITY OF THE QUEEN S PRINTER/PUBLIÉE CHAQUE SEMAINE SOUS L AUTORITÉ DE L IMPRIMEUR DE LA REINE THE SASKATCHEWAN GAZETTE, 5 MAI 2017 287 The Saskatchewan Gazette PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY AUTHORITY OF THE QUEEN S PRINTER/PUBLIÉE CHAQUE SEMAINE SOUS L AUTORITÉ DE L IMPRIMEUR DE LA REINE PART II/PARTIE II

More information

Protection against the dilution of a trade mark. The Groups are invited to answer the following questions under their national laws:

Protection against the dilution of a trade mark. The Groups are invited to answer the following questions under their national laws: Question Q214 National Group: Canadian Group Title: Protection against the dilution of a trade mark Contributors: Steven Garland; Tracy Corneau Representative within Working Committee: Steven Garland and

More information

Przemek KUCHARSKI, Alice MORRISON, Rebecca SADLEIR, Michael POPKIN, Natalie TALIA, Grant FISHER

Przemek KUCHARSKI, Alice MORRISON, Rebecca SADLEIR, Michael POPKIN, Natalie TALIA, Grant FISHER Question Q241 National Group: Title: Contributors: Australia IP licensing and insolvency Przemek KUCHARSKI, Alice MORRISON, Rebecca SADLEIR, Michael POPKIN, Natalie TALIA, Grant FISHER Reporter within

More information

FINLAND Utility Model Decree No of December 5, 1991 As amended by Decree No. 581 of July 18, Enter into force on September 1, 2013.

FINLAND Utility Model Decree No of December 5, 1991 As amended by Decree No. 581 of July 18, Enter into force on September 1, 2013. FINLAND Utility Model Decree No. 1419 of December 5, 1991 As amended by Decree No. 581 of July 18, 2013. Enter into force on September 1, 2013. TABLE OF CONTENTS Utility Model Applications and Record of

More information

Overview economic research activities at the EPO 2013/2014

Overview economic research activities at the EPO 2013/2014 Overview economic research activities at the EPO 2013/2014 Theon van Dijk EPO Chief Economist PSDM 2013, Rio de Janeiro 12 November 2013 Overview 1. Trends in European patenting 2. Follow-up IPR-intensive

More information

pct2ep.com Guide to claim amendment after EPO regional phase entry

pct2ep.com Guide to claim amendment after EPO regional phase entry pct2ep.com Guide to claim amendment after EPO regional phase entry Claim amendments in the EPO Guide to the issues to consider After a PCT application enters the EPO regional phase, and before any search

More information

Brazil Brésil Brasilien. Report Q205

Brazil Brésil Brasilien. Report Q205 Brazil Brésil Brasilien Report Q205 in the name of the Brazilian Group by Carlos EDSON STRASBURG, Cláudio Roberto BARBOSA, Cristina PALMER, Gabriela NEVES, Maitê Cecilia FABBRI MORO and Marc EHLERS Exhaustion

More information

Our Speakers: Rudy I. Kratz Partner; Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP. Tony Wray Director and Founder; Optimus Patents Ltd.

Our Speakers: Rudy I. Kratz Partner; Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP. Tony Wray Director and Founder; Optimus Patents Ltd. Our Speakers: Rudy I. Kratz Partner; Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP Tony Wray Director and Founder; Optimus Patents Ltd. August 30, 2016 2016 Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP First of All... These

More information

AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges

AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges AUSTRALIA - Standard Patents - Schedule of Charges Effective 1 January 2018 Applications 1 Filing non-convention Standard application (filed electronically) 370.00 630.00 1000.00 2 Filing PCT AU National

More information

Order on Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates

Order on Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates 1 The Patent and Trademark Office Order No. 25 of 18 January 2013 Order on Patents and Supplementary Protection Certificates Pursuant to section 5(2), section 6(2), section 8a, section 8b(2), section 9,

More information

DENMARK Patents Regulations Order No. 25 of 18 January, 2013 ENTRY INTO FORCE: 1 February, 2013

DENMARK Patents Regulations Order No. 25 of 18 January, 2013 ENTRY INTO FORCE: 1 February, 2013 DENMARK Patents Regulations Order No. 25 of 18 January, 2013 ENTRY INTO FORCE: 1 February, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part I Patent applications Chapter 1 Scope 1. Chapter 2 The contents and filing of applications

More information

Working Guidelines. Question Q209. Selection Inventions the Inventive Step Requirement, other Patentability Criteria and Scope of Protection

Working Guidelines. Question Q209. Selection Inventions the Inventive Step Requirement, other Patentability Criteria and Scope of Protection Working Guidelines by Jochen E. BÜHLING, Reporter General Dariusz SZLEPER and Thierry CALAME, Deputy Reporters General Nicolai LINDGREEN, Nicola DAGG and Shoichi OKUYAMA Assistants to the Reporter General

More information

Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association. May 23, 2012

Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association. May 23, 2012 Your Guide to the America Invents Act (AIA) Presented to The Ohio State Bar Association May 23, 2012 Overview A. Most comprehensive change to U.S. patent law in over 60 years; signed into law Sept. 16,

More information

Nellie Taptaqut Kusugak, O. Nu. Commissioner of Nunavut Commissaire du Nunavut

Nellie Taptaqut Kusugak, O. Nu. Commissioner of Nunavut Commissaire du Nunavut THIRD SESSION FOURTH LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NUNAVUT TROISIÈME SESSION QUATRIÈME ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DU NUNAVUT HOUSE BILL BILL 9 AN ACT TO AMEND THE NUNAVUT ELECTIONS ACT AND THE PLEBISCITES ACT PROJET

More information

Unitary Patent in Europe & Unified Patent Court (UPC)

Unitary Patent in Europe & Unified Patent Court (UPC) Unitary Patent in Europe & Unified Patent Court (UPC) An overview and a comparison to the classical patent system in Europe 1 Today s situation: Obtaining patent protection in Europe Direct filing and

More information

THE NEW EU PATENT: COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES FOR YOUR BUSINESS

THE NEW EU PATENT: COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES FOR YOUR BUSINESS THE NEW EU PATENT: COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES FOR YOUR BUSINESS GRAHAM MURNANE (GLASGOW OFFICE), DR MARINA MAURO (MILAN OFFICE), DR BEN GRAU (MUNICH OFFICE) EUROPEAN PATENT PACKAGE EUROPEAN PATENT PACKAGE

More information

Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines

Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines Issues 1. Statistics on Examination a. Number of applications per year 2009 2,935 2010 3,390 2011 3,120 2012 2,981 As of October 2013 2,571 b. Fraction of

More information

Selection Inventions the Inventive Step Requirement, other Patentability Criteria and Scope of Protection

Selection Inventions the Inventive Step Requirement, other Patentability Criteria and Scope of Protection Question Q209 National Group: Title: Contributors: AIPPI Indonesia Selection Inventions the Inventive Step Requirement, other Patentability Criteria and Scope of Protection Arifia J. Fajra (discussed by

More information

Amendments in Europe and the United States

Amendments in Europe and the United States 13 Euro IP ch2-6.qxd 15/04/2009 11:16 Page 90 90 IP FIT FOR PURPOSE Amendments in Europe and the United States Attitudes differ if you try to broaden your claim after applications, reports Annalise Holme.

More information

Week 5 cumulative project: immigration in the French and Francophone world.

Week 5 cumulative project: immigration in the French and Francophone world. IPA Worksheet for Novice High French Students Theme : Immigration to the French Hexagon French 1103: An Accelerated Introduction to French in the World is designed for students with three to four years

More information

Federal Court Reports Dutch Industries Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) (T.D.) [2002] 1 F.C. 325

Federal Court Reports Dutch Industries Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) (T.D.) [2002] 1 F.C. 325 Page 1 of 11 Source: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2001/2001fct879/2001fct879.html Federal Court Reports Dutch Industries Ltd. v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents) (T.D.) [2002] 1 F.C. 325 Date: 20010813

More information

PERU ANSWERS IN THE NAME OF THE PERUVIAN GROUP. by Maria del Carmen Arana Courrejolles QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS

PERU ANSWERS IN THE NAME OF THE PERUVIAN GROUP. by Maria del Carmen Arana Courrejolles QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS PERU ANSWERS IN THE NAME OF THE PERUVIAN GROUP by Maria del Carmen Arana Courrejolles QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PUBLICATION OF PATENT APPLICATIONS Questions Groups are invited to answer the following questions

More information

Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security

Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security SECU NUMBER 055 1st SESSION 42nd PARLIAMENT EVIDENCE Monday, March 6, 2017 Chair Mr. Robert Oliphant 1 Standing Committee on Public Safety and

More information

ExCo Singapore. Plenary Session. Question Q193: Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications

ExCo Singapore. Plenary Session. Question Q193: Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications ExCo Singapore Plenary Session Question Q193: Divisional, Continuation and Continuation in Part Patent Applications Sunday, 7 October 2007 (14.00 15.30 and 16.00 17.30) The session was opened by the Chairman

More information

Standing Committee on Patents. Questionnaire on the Publication of Patent Applications

Standing Committee on Patents. Questionnaire on the Publication of Patent Applications Standing Committee on Patents Questionnaire on the Publication of Patent Applications Introduction 1. Many of the world's national and regional patent systems provide a time limit by which a patent application

More information

Practice for Patent Application

Practice for Patent Application Practice for Patent Application Japan Patent Office Asia-Pacific Industrial Property Center, JIPII 2013 Collaborator: Kiyomune NAKAGAWA, Patent Attorney, Nakagawa Patent Office CONTENTS Page I. Patent

More information

JERSEY LAW COMMISSION TOPIC REPORT NO. 2 - October 1999

JERSEY LAW COMMISSION TOPIC REPORT NO. 2 - October 1999 JERSEY LAW COMMISSION TOPIC REPORT NO. 2 - October 1999 REPORT DÉGRÈVEMENT To be laid before the States by the President of the Legislation Committee pursuant to the Proposition to establish the Commission

More information

B+/SG/2/10 ORIGINAL: English DATE: 27/05/2015. B+ Sub-Group OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES, WITH COMMENTARY ON POTENTIAL OUTCOMES. prepared by the Chair

B+/SG/2/10 ORIGINAL: English DATE: 27/05/2015. B+ Sub-Group OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES, WITH COMMENTARY ON POTENTIAL OUTCOMES. prepared by the Chair E B+/SG/2/10 ORIGINAL: English DATE: 27/05/2015 B+ Sub-Group OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES, WITH COMMENTARY ON POTENTIAL OUTCOMES prepared by the Chair B+ Sub-Group Objectives and Principles, with commentary

More information

Patent litigation in Europe Major changes to come. Anne-Charlotte Le Bihan, Partner, Bird & Bird ABPI, Rio de Janeiro August 20, 2013

Patent litigation in Europe Major changes to come. Anne-Charlotte Le Bihan, Partner, Bird & Bird ABPI, Rio de Janeiro August 20, 2013 Patent litigation in Europe Major changes to come Anne-Charlotte Le Bihan, Partner, Bird & Bird ABPI, Rio de Janeiro August 20, 2013 Introduction: Patent litigation in Europe today and tomorrow Patent

More information

2015 Noréns Patentbyrå AB

2015 Noréns Patentbyrå AB Self-Collision in patent applications How to Avoid Shooting Your Client in the Foot A European perspective with some thoughts on the global situation, including other jurisdictions Jan Modin FICPI Special

More information

pct2ep.com the reliable and efficient way to progress your PCT patent application in Europe Pocket Guide to European Patents

pct2ep.com the reliable and efficient way to progress your PCT patent application in Europe Pocket Guide to European Patents pct2ep.com the reliable and efficient way to progress your PCT patent application in Europe Pocket Guide to European Patents How it works 1. Get a quote Enter the number of your PCT application and a few

More information

BE IT RESOLVED AS A SPECIAL RESOLUTION THAT:

BE IT RESOLVED AS A SPECIAL RESOLUTION THAT: SPECIAL RESOLUTION OF MEMBERS Continuing the Corporation under the provisions of the Canada Not- for- profit Corporations Actand authorizing the directors to apply for a Certificate of Continuance. WHEREAS

More information

The effects of the EPC

The effects of the EPC The effects of the EPC The second round of amendments to the European Patent Convention Implementing Regulations is imminent By Paul-Alexander Wacker and Stephan Kopp, Kuhnen & Wacker IP firm, Freising

More information

Bruno van Pottelsberghe 9/23/2008. The European Patent System: Drawbacks and challenges

Bruno van Pottelsberghe 9/23/2008. The European Patent System: Drawbacks and challenges The European Patent System: Drawbacks and challenges B. van Pottelsberghe Bruegel, Brussels 23 September, 2008 Context: To provide a detailed analysis of the European patent system: Challenges, Weaknesses,

More information

2016 Study Question (Patents)

2016 Study Question (Patents) 2016 Study Question (Patents) Submission date: 25th April 2016 Sarah MATHESON, Reporter General John OSHA and Anne Marie VERSCHUUR, Deputy Reporters General Yusuke INUI, Ari LAAKKONEN and Ralph NACK, Assistants

More information

The Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande. Report Q189. in the name of the Dutch Group

The Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande. Report Q189. in the name of the Dutch Group The Netherlands Pays Bas Niederlande Report Q189 in the name of the Dutch Group Amendment of patent claims after grant (in court and administrative proceedings, including re examination proceedings requested

More information