Patents: opposition proceedings and nullity actions a comparison between Europe and Japan
|
|
- Emerald Gallagher
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 moderators Dr.sc. Robert Börner Dr. Yoshitaka Sonoda Webinar, April 27,
2 Option 1 : OPPOSITION u Filed within 6 months from publication of the patent u Oppositions were revived in Japan in u 1250 oppositions were filed in 2017 Option 2 : NULLITY ACTION u Filed any time after grant of the patent u 161 Nullity Actions were filed in Japan in 2017 q 318,028 patents were filed in 2017 in Japan q 199,577 patents were registered 1
3 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO / NATIONAL INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS Number of granted patents in 2017: 105,635 Number of oppositions filed in 2017: 3900 Source: EPO Status: Invalidation proceedings at the Federal German Patent Court (2016) Filed: 284 Pending: 403 Closed: 206 Patent revoked: % Patent upheld in amended form: % Invalidation request rejected: % 2
4 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO - ENTITLEMENT opposition open to any person (Art. 99 (1) EPC) no own legal interest required one exception: patent owner not entitled to file an opposition (however, the inventor is) opponent needs to be identifiable not possible to file an opposition anonymously use of third party as straw man allowable, unless the intent is to circumvent the law not possible to use straw man for patentee status as opponent may be transferred/assigned only as part of the opponent's business assets 3
5 u Any third can file an Opposition, not only interested party u An Opposition can be filed anonymously, using a straw man Advice to Opponent Ø The strawman should not be a patent attorney so as to actually hide the true identity Ø Choosing an Opposition is recommended if you want to remain anonymous 4
6 Reasons for which an Opposition may be made are matters of public interest: u lack of novelty or lack of inventive step u lack of support, clarity or enablement u Introduction of new matter by amendments Double patenting Non patentable subject matter Advice to Opponent Ø An Opposition is not an inter-partes procedure, the opponent must convince the board of appeals, and the board may raise its own reasons for revocation 5
7 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO GROUNDS (1) Art 100 EPC (a) the subject-matter of the European patent is not patentable under Art. 52 to 57 EPC lack of novelty / inventiveness excluded subject matter no industrial application (b) the European patent does not disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art ( lack of sufficiency ) (c) the subject-matter of the European patent extends beyond the content of the application as filed (Art 123 (2) EPC) No grounds: lack of unity / lack of clarity / lack of support / formal matters / inventor designation wrong / patentee not entitled to patent / 6
8 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO GROUNDS (2) all raised grounds need to be substantiated in the notice of opposition new grounds for opposition, i.e. grounds raised after the expiry of the opposition period only allowable, if prima facie relevant may also be raised by the opposition division grounds covered by Art 100(a) are separate grounds Amended claims need to comply with all requirements of the EPC if amendments are based on description only new grounds may be raised further objections possible (e.g. clarity, unity, ) ADVICE: Raise and substantiate all grounds for opposition in the notice of opposition! 7
9 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO - TIMEFRAME deadline for filing opposition is 9 months from the publication of the mention of the grant of the European patent EPO initiative early certainty for opposition lower average time to 15 months (currently > 25 months) Strict deadline regime (EoT only in exceptional cases) officially one round of submissions before summons to oral proceedings, i.e. opposition note and reply of patentee 8
10 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO - HEARING summons at least 6 months before hearing summons includes preliminary opinion last statements to be filed 2 month before hearing new requests / evidence only admitted if prima facie relevant possible outcome (decision at end of hearing) maintain patent as granted maintain patent in amended form revoke patent minutes and written decision will follow within some weeks after the hearing 9
11 Ø The 6-month time period is short for non- Japanese opponents and filing a Nullity Action would be more suitable in cases in which counter-experiments must be performed, in particular Ø There is no oral hearing, therefore test data and affidavits must be detailed and self-explanatory Ø A decision can be expected within 6 months 10
12 Opponent Filing of Opposition JPO Publication of patent Forwarding of copy Start Examination Patentee May request acceleration Filing of Remarks (when amendments are requested) Are there reasons for revocation? Yes Notify of reasons for revocation Request comments (if amending) No Filing of Remarks and/or Amendments Continued Examination Decision by board 11
13 u A decision to maintain the patent cannot be appealed. In contrast, the patentee can file an appeal against a decision of revocation with the IP high court. u Filing a Nullity Action would be the next step Ø However, overturning a decision by a Nullity Action requires a higher burden of proof Ø We recommend waiting at least 6 months to allow for potential changes in board membership 12
14 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO APPEAL (1) appeal to be filed within two months of notification of the contested decision appeal fee to be paid grounds to be filed within four months of notification of the contested decision appeal only possible if adversely affected by decision no reformatio in peius grounds of appeal and reply should contain a party s complete case, i.e. all facts, arguments, requests and evidence later filed evidence / requests may be rejected 13
15 OPPOSITION AT THE EPO APPEAL (2) some boards will only review legal aspects of the first instance decision (maybe in future all boards) only requests filed in first instance will be accepted no further technical discussion possible usually one round of submissions before summons to oral proceedings (with preliminary opinion) deadline for final submissions 1 month before hearing it is possible for the board to remit case to first instance current time frame 3 4 years, to be decreased by increase of productivity 14
16 NATIONAL INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS (FOCUS DE) EP patent divided into plurality of national patents no centralized invalidation possible Germany court action at Federal German Patent Court formalistic proceedings open to general public (no legal interest needed) no deadline but not possible, if opposition pending language of proceedings is German but language of EP patent relevant 15
17 GERMAN INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS (1) one round of statements, i.e. grounds for invalidity and reply by patentee preliminary opinion of court indication main issues and setting date for oral proceedings one more round of statements possible in preparation of oral proceedings decision on costs (losing party bears costs) high cost risk (depending on value of case) 16
18 GERMAN INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS (2) possible grounds for invalidation are the same as in EP opposition, however, additional ground of fraudulent abstraction patent court not bound to earlier decision of EPO additional prior art in form of national earlier rights possible to raise same ground for invalidation as in earlier opposition advisable to rely on additional documents if possible average time frame until decision is 25 months 17
19 GERMAN INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS APPEAL appeal to Federal German High Court to be filed within one month of notification of the contested decision grounds to be filed within three months of notification of the contested decision appeal only possible if adversely affected by decision no reformatio in peius High Court reviews appeal for admissibility and summons for oral proceedings High Court may ask for further statements 18
20 GERMAN INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS APPEAL new evidence, arguments and requests may be rejected as late filed in principle only a legal review of first instance decision court may call for technical expert decision taken in oral proceedings timeframe: 2 to 4 years decision on costs (losing party bears costs) high cost risk (depending on value of case) around 60 new cases per year 19
21 u An interested third party can file a Nullity Action any time after grant of a patent u Nullity Actions therefore cannot be filed anonymously u The cost is 2-3 times as much as for an Opposition u For a 10-claim application, the official fees are about 300 euros for an opposition but 780 for a Nullity Action u Attorney hours usually double due to preparation for and attendance of oral hearings u A decision can be expected within a year 20
22 Reasons to invalidate a patent are similar to those for an Opposition: u Lack of novelty or lack of inventive step u Lack of support, clarity or enablement u Introduction of new matter by amendments Double patenting Non-patentable subject matter u Additionally, the ownership of the patent may be raised u The board of appeals is bound by the reasons and arguments and cannot raise any additional reasons to invalidate the patent 21
23 u In contrast with oppositions, an opponent may appeal the decision to maintain the patent to the IP High court u The patentee can also appeal a decision of invalidation Ø Nullity Actions had a 60% success rate in 2006, however, among the 345 decisions issued last year, only 30.9% were to invalidate 22
24 Opposition Nullity Action Comments Term for filing 6 months from publication of patent Any time after grant Only a Nullity Action is available after 6 months have passed Eligibility for filing Any third party Interested parties A strawman may be used for an Opposition Possible reasons for filing Reasons for rejection Reasons for rejection + rights ownership Only a Nullity Action is available for ownership Style of proceedings Initiative by the board Inter-partes An Opposition is more difficult to invalidate a patent? Presentation of arguments Documentary Documentary + oral examination No disadvantage for foreign party in an Opposition 23
25 Opposition Nullity Action Comments Withdrawal Not possible after a Notice of Reasons for Revocation is issued Anytime before finalization of the decision Official fees JPY 16,500 (124 euros) + JPY 2,400 (18 euros) x Nc JPY 49,500 (373 euros) + JPY 5,500 (41 euros) x Nc The total cost tends to be higher for Nullity Actions Speed 5.8 months on average One year Difference insubstantial if appealed Appeals Revocation may be appealed by patentee at the IP High Court All decisions may be appealed to the IP High Court Once an Opposition is rejected, new evidence will likely be needed to invalidate the same patent with a Nullity Action 24
26 EPO OPPOSITION VS. INVALIDATION EPO opposition Centralized proceedings Each party bears own costs cheap Only EP earlier rights Only possible within 9 month after grant EPO may continue opposition after withdrawal Invalidation Plurality of national proceedings Losing party bears costs High cost risk Additional national earlier rights No deadline for filing court action Possible in addition to EP opposition Ends if action withdrawn EPO opposition seems advisable 25
27 Year Total Decisions Revoked Maintained (Amendments) Maintained (No Amendments) Withdrawn or Dismissed Pending* (12.7%) 167 (46.1%) 145 (40.1%) 4 (1.1%) 1 } Low success rate for opponents who seek the revocation of a patent } Recent pro-patent trend at the JPO } The success rate for Oppositions is low (12.7%) compared to that for Nullity Actions (30%) 26
28 In decisions to maintain a patent, the claims were amended in 51.3% of the cases, however u Amendments are made by the patentee and the resulting patentability is examined by the board of appeals; u The opponent cannot directly influence the amendments and the claims. 27
29 Choose Opposition for: v Lower costs v Speed v Anonymity Ø An Opposition can be seen as a continuation of Observations Choose Nullity Action if: ² Invalidation is of the utmost importance ² 6 months is too short to prepare evidence ² Ownership of the invention is to be raised ² To be used as a tool for negotiation (license against withdrawal) 28
30 INVALIDATION PROCEEDINGS FOR UNITARY PATENTS invalidation action for unitary patent to be filed at Central Division of Unified Patent Court centralized proceedings with one decision for full territorial scope of unitary patent language of proceedings is language of patent very strict time frame (12 15 months) high court fees and cost risk (based on value of case) appeal possible no case law unknown territory 29
31 UPC AND UNITARY PATENT - STATUS court action pending against UPC scheme at German Constitutional Court decision expected during this year (?) if positive decision, a fast ratification by DE and UK is possible UPC system may enter into force within months effect of BREXIT??? 30
32 Topic 1 Topic 2 Topic 3 Topic 4 Contact Thanks to the audience! Dr. Yoshitaka Sonoda Sonoda & Kobayashi Dr.sc. Robert Börner Murgitroyd, Munich Office
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 informationUnitary 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 informationComparison between Opposition Systems in Europe and Japan
Comparison between Opposition Systems in Europe and Japan First published in Patent 2017, Vol. 70, No.5 Authors: Dr. Christian Köster European Patent Attorney Kazuya Sekiguchi Japanese and European Patent
More informationReview of Current Status of Post-Grant Opposition System in Comparison with Invalidation Trial System
Seiwa Patent & Law (IP Information Section) Dated April 29, 2016 Review of Current Status of Post-Grant Opposition System in Comparison with Invalidation Trial System Miyako Saito (patent attorney) and
More informationThird Party Observations, Oppositions & Invalidation Trials of Patents in Japan
Third Party Observations, Oppositions & Invalidation Trials of Patents in Japan Aki Ryuka Japanese Patent Attorney Attorney at Law, California, U.S.A. October 12, 2015 This information is provided for
More informationEuropean Patent Opposition Proceedings
European Patent Opposition Proceedings www.bardehle.com 2 Content 5 Initiating opposition proceedings 5 Grounds for revocation 6 Course of first instance proceedings 8 The appeal proceedings 10 Procedural
More informationR 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 informationThe 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 informationThe Unified Patent Court explained in detail. Managing Intellectual Property European Patent Reform Forum 19 September 2013 Munich
The Unified Patent Court explained in detail Managing Intellectual Property European Patent Reform Forum 19 September 2013 Munich The Panel Alex Wilson Lawyer Powell & Gilbert London Christine Kanz Lawyer
More informationOverview of Trial for Invalidation and Opposition Systems in Japan. March 2017 Trial and Appeal Department Japan Patent Office
Overview of Trial for Invalidation and Opposition Systems in Japan March 2017 Trial and Appeal Department Japan Patent Office 1 Roles of Trial and Appeal Department of JPO Reviewing the examination ->
More informationWhere to Challenge Patents? International Post Grant Practice Strategic Considerations Before the USPTO, EPO, SIPO and JPO
Washington, D.C. Where to Challenge Patents? International Post Grant Practice Strategic Considerations Before the USPTO, EPO, SIPO and JPO Jeffery P. Langer, PhD U.S. Patent Attorney, Partner, Washington,
More informationAnnex 2 DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS AND FOR STATISTICS ON PROCEDURES
DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS AND FOR STATISTICS ON PROCEDURES This annex contains firstly definitions of the main terms used in the report 51. After that there is an explanation of the patent procedures relating
More informationManaging 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 informationPatent Protection: Europe
Patent Protection: Europe Currently available options: National Patent European Patent (EP) Centralised registration procedure (bundle of nationally enforceable patents) Applicant designates the states
More informationTHE 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 informationUPC FUTURE OF PATENT LITIGATION IN EUROPE. Alexander Haertel
UPC FUTURE OF PATENT LITIGATION IN EUROPE Alexander Haertel MAIN TOPICS What will happen? - The Unified Patent Court (UPC) will change the landscape of patent litigation in Europe - It is a front-loaded
More informationUnitary Patent Procedure before the EPO
Unitary Patent Procedure before the EPO Platform Formalities Officers EPO The Hague H.-C. Haugg Director Legal and Unitary Patent Division D.5.2.3 20 April 2017 Part I General Information What is the legal
More informationPOST-GRANT AMENDMENT JOHN RICHARDS
23 rd Annual Fordham Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference Cambridge, April 8-9, 2015 POST-GRANT AMENDMENT JOHN RICHARDS The Problem There is a real life problem in that when filing a patent application
More information4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA
4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA Provisions of the Indian patent law were compared with the relevant provisions of the patent laws in U.S., Europe and
More informationOur 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 informationQUESTION 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 informationCandidate'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 informationThe European Patent and the UPC
The European Patent and the UPC Robin Keulertz German Patent Attorney, European Patent Attorney, European Trademark and Design Attorney February 22nd, 2019 Current European Patent Grant Procedure Invention
More informationThe 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 informationFC3 (P5) International Patent Law 2 FINAL Mark Scheme 2017
Question 1 Part A Your UK-based client, NC Ltd, employs 50 people and is about to file a new US patent application, US1, claiming priority from a GB patent application, GB0. US1 is not subject to any licensing.
More informationRevision of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal
Revision of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal Revised public draft, for presentation at the User consultation conference on 5 December 2018 25 October 2018 Deletions are struck through; additions/modifications
More informationXVI.3. Maintenance of the patent in amended form
XVI.3. Maintenance of the patent in amended form XVI.3.1. Art.101(3)(a) and R.82 contain the legal provisions for the maintenance of a patent in amended form. The current EPO practice for implementing
More informationPatent litigation. Block 2. Module Jurisdiction and procedure Complementary reading: Unified Patent Court Agreement ( UPCA )
Essentials: Patent litigation. Block 2. Unified Patent Court Agreement ( UPCA ) PART I - GENERAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS The Unified Patent Court (UPC) will be a specialised patent court common to
More informationTHE NEW EUROPEAN UNIFIED PATENT COURT & THE UNITARY PATENT
THE NEW EUROPEAN UNIFIED PATENT COURT & THE UNITARY PATENT November 2015 Washington Kevin Mooney Simmons & Simmons LLP The Current Problems with enforcement of European patents European Patent Convention
More informationKey to the European Patent Convention Edition Part VI
Key to the European Patent Convention Edition 2011 Part VI Article 106 - Decisions subject to appeal PART VI - APPEALS PROCEDURE Article 106 i - Decisions subject to appeal (1) An appeal shall lie from
More informationConsiderations on IP Law Enforcement in Europe
M I C H A L S K I H Ü T T E R M A N N & P A R T N E R Considerations on IP Law Enforcement in Europe Dr. Dirk Schulz European Patents - Not a single patent for EPC or EC - Common examination at EPO for
More informationThe proposed amendments to the Rules of the Boards of Appeal. Patentee s Perspective. Bayerischer Patentanwaltsverein e.v.
The proposed amendments to the Rules of the Boards of Appeal Patentee s Perspective Bayerischer Patentanwaltsverein e.v. 13 November 2018 For discussion purposes only Dr. Hendrik Wichmann, Wuesthoff &
More informationIP 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 informationThreats & 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 informationDETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface... v v About the Authors... xiii vii Summary Table of Contents... xv ix Chapter 1. European Patent Law as International Law... 1 I. European Patent Law Arises From Multiple
More informationDraft Rules relating to Unitary Patent Protection revised version of Rules 1 to 11 of SC/16/13
SC/22/13 Orig.: en Munich, 22.11.2013 SUBJECT: SUBMITTED BY: ADDRESSEES: Draft Rules relating to Unitary Patent Protection revised version of Rules 1 to 11 of SC/16/13 President of the European Patent
More informationEuropean Unitary Patents and the Unified Patent Court
European Unitary Patents and the Unified Patent Court Kevin Mooney July 2013 The Problem European Patent Convention Bundle Patents Single granting procedure but national enforcement No common appeal court
More informationUnderstanding the Unified Patent Court: The Next Rocket-Docket for Patent Owners?
Understanding the Unified Patent Court: The Next Rocket-Docket for Patent Owners? By Kevin R. Greenleaf, Michael W. O Neill, and Aloys Hüettermann Kevin R. Greenleaf is a counsel at Dentons US LLP where
More informationEuropean Patent Litigation: An overview
European Patent Litigation: An overview Tuesday 28 September 2010 Hogan Lovells in partnership with the Association of Corporate Counsel Europe Your speaker panel Co-Chairs: Marten Bezemer Associate General
More informationThe nuts and bolts of oppositions and appeals. Henrik Skødt, European Patent Attorney
The nuts and bolts of oppositions and appeals Henrik Skødt, European Patent Attorney Overview Preparing a notice of opposition. Responding to an opposition. Oral proceedings Filing an appeal notice and
More informationDehns Guide to the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court
Dehns Guide to the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court Contents Introduction 1 Part I: The Unitary Patent 2 Part II: The Unified Patent Court 16 Part III: Implications for Brexit 32 Summary: How Dehns
More informationFoundation Certificate
Foundation Certificate International Patent Law FC3 Friday 13 October 2017 10:00 to 13:00 INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES 1. You should attempt five of questions 1 to 6. 2. Each question carries 20 marks. 3.
More informationand Examination Reports
Interpreting and Utilizing Search and Examination Reports WIPO Sub-Regional Workshop, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 29.11.-01.12.2011 Steffen Wolf, European Patent Office, Munich, Germany Work-sharing: Information
More informationPart 1 Current Status of Intellectual Property Rights
Part 1 Current Status of Intellectual Property Rights Annual Report 214 Part 1 Chapter 1 Current Status of Applications, Registrations, Examinations, Appeals and Trials in and outside Japan The landscape
More informationPatents in Europe 2016/2017. Helping business compete in the global economy
In association with Greece Maria Athanassiadou and Henning Voelkel Dr Helen G Papaconstantinou and Partners Patents in Europe 2016/2017 Helping business compete in the global economy Dr Helen G Papaconstantinou
More informationIntellectual Property and crystalline forms. How to get a European Patent on crystalline forms?
Intellectual Property and crystalline forms How to get a European Patent on crystalline forms? Ambrogio Usuelli Chief-Examiner European Patent Office, Munich, Germany Bologna, 19th January 2012 Sponsor:
More informationUnitary Patent Guide. Obtaining, maintaining and managing Unitary Patents
Unitary Patent Guide Obtaining, maintaining and managing Unitary Patents 1 st edition August 2017 Unitary Patent Guide Obtaining, maintaining and managing Unitary Patents 1st edition, 2017 Contents A.
More informationOverview on EPO s Current Initiatives for Improving Timeliness. Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law
Overview on EPO s Current Initiatives for Improving Timeliness Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law 14 October 2016 Content Time matters Early Certainty Expediting the Proceedings Streamlined opposition
More informationti Litigating Patents Overseas: Country Specific Considerations Germany There is no "European" litigation system.
Wolfgang Festl-Wietek of Viering Jentschura & Partner Speaker 11: 1 LSI Law Seminars International ti Litigating Patents Overseas: Country Specific Considerations Germany by Wolfgang Festl-Wietek Viering,
More informationPresumption Of Patent Validity In Patent Litigations The New Trends
Presumption Of Patent Validity In Patent Litigations The New Trends 11 th EGA Legal Affairs Forum March 27, 2015 Kristof Roox, Partner, Crowell & Moring Contents A. Prima facie" validity of patents in
More informationUNIFIED PATENT SYSTEM: A NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN EUROPE
March 2013 UNIFIED PATENT SYSTEM: A NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN EUROPE After four decades of negotiations, on 19 February 2013 24 EU states signed the agreement on a Unified Patent Court
More informationThe life of a patent application at the EPO
The life of a patent application at the EPO Yves Verbandt Noordwijk, 31/03/2016 Yves Verbandt Senior expert examiner Applied Physics guided-wave optics optical measurements flow and level measurements
More informationFC3 International Patent Law Question Paper Sample Assessment Material
SECTION A Question 1 a) List six facts relating to utility models, at least one of which should relate to a difference between utility models and patents. b) Can utility models be obtained in Germany,
More informationNews and analysis on IP law, regulation and policy from around the world. For the latest updates, visit
WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REPORT >>> News and analysis on IP law, regulation and policy from around the world. For the latest updates, visit www.bna.com International Information for International Business
More informationPatents in Europe 2018/2019. Helping business compete in the global economy. How to prepare for oral proceedings for European patents
In association with How to prepare for oral proceedings for European patents NLO Hans Hutter and René van Duijvenbode Patents in Europe 2018/2019 Helping business compete in the global economy HOW TO FORTIFY
More informationEuropean Patent with Unitary Effect
European Patent with Unitary Effect and the Unified Patent Court May 2013 Dr Lee Chapman lchapman@jakemp.com www.jakemp.com Where are we? Regulations relating to the EPUE and translation arrangements were
More informationOpposition and Post-Grant Patent Reviews Conference on Patent Reform Berkeley Center for Law and Technology April 16, 2004
Opposition and Post-Grant Patent Reviews Conference on Patent Reform Berkeley Center for Law and Technology April 16, 2004 Dietmar Harhoff University of Munich and CEPR 1 Summary of empirical results Interpretation
More informationGermany. Henrik Holzapfel and Martin Königs. McDermott Will & Emery
GERMANY Germany Henrik Holzapfel and Martin Königs Patent Enforcement Proceedings 1 Lawsuits and courts What legal or administrative proceedings are available for enforcing patent rights against an infringer?
More information10 tips for oppositions and the inevitable oral proceedings Barry Franks, European and Swedish patent attorney BRANN AB IP Law Firm Sweden
10 tips for oppositions and the inevitable oral proceedings Barry Franks, European and Swedish patent attorney BRANN AB IP Law Firm Sweden Stockholm, Uppsala, Göteborg och Lund Barry Franks Background
More informationPATENT SYSTEM STATUS OFREFORMS
THE UNITARY PATENT SYSTEM STATUS OFREFORMS 1. STATUS OF REFORMS* On December 11, 2012 the EU Parliament approved the implementation of the Unitary Patent System based on a Unitary Patent Regulation (Council
More information5 Multiple Protection of Inventions
5 Multiple Protection of Inventions From the perspective of helping front runners efforts to obtain multiple protection rights and achieving international harmonization of systems, research studies were
More informationEffective Mechanisms for Challenging the Validity of Patents
Effective Mechanisms for Challenging the Validity of Patents Walter Holzer 1 S.G.D.G. Patents are granted with a presumption of validity. 2 A patent examiner simply cannot be aware of all facts and circumstances
More informationA New World (Patent) Order. How the US Patent Reform Act (AIA) Compares with European Patent Regulations
A New World (Patent) Order How the US Patent Reform Act (AIA) Compares with European Patent Regulations Peter Thurlow & Andreas Holzwarth-Rochford VPP-Bezirksgruppe Mitte October 10, 2012 AIA Compared
More informationDr Julian M. Potter February 2014
The European Patent Court and Unitary Patent Don t Panic Be Prepared Dr Julian M. Potter February 2014 (c) Dr Julian M Potter 2014 1 Patent in Europe - now National patents through respective national
More informationPatent 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 informationEvidence in EPO Proceedings. Dr. Joachim Renken Madrid, November 14, 2016
Evidence in EPO Proceedings Dr. Joachim Renken Madrid, November 14, 2016 General Principles Who carries the burden of proof during prosecution? Who bears the burden during opposition? Exceptions Who bears
More informationPCT procedure before the EPO as International Authority. Camille-Rémy Bogliolo Head, Department of PCT Affairs
PCT procedure before the EPO as International Authority Camille-Rémy Bogliolo Head, Department of PCT Affairs Madrid, 3 November 2016 PCT procedure before the EPO as ISA and IPEA Informal clarification
More informationIP IN A POST-BREXIT EUROPE ENSURING YOUR EUROPEAN IP RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED DATE: 10 NOVEMBER 2016 PRESENTERS: CHRIS FINN, BEN GRAU AND GRAHAM MURNANE
IP IN A POST-BREXIT EUROPE ENSURING YOUR EUROPEAN IP RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED DATE: 10 NOVEMBER 2016 PRESENTERS: CHRIS FINN, BEN GRAU AND GRAHAM MURNANE BACKGROUND A fundamental aspect of the European Union
More informationAMENDMENTS TO THE SINGAPORE PATENTS ACT AND RULES
AMENDMENTS TO THE SINGAPORE PATENTS ACT AND RULES Entry into Force: 14 February 2014 INTRODUCTION Amendments to the Singapore Patents Act and Rules are due to come into force on 14 February 2014. The amendments
More informationPatent Fees and Pricing: Structures and Policies
Patent Fees and Pricing: Structures and Policies The Output of R&D activities: Harnessing the Power of Patent Data JRC-IPTS 4 th Workshop Nikolaus Thumm, EPO Chief Economist Sevilla 24 May, 2012 Background
More informationUK trade mark application opposition procedure
UK trade mark application opposition procedure If opposition is based on s.5(1), (2) or (3) of Trade Marks Act and earlier right is more than five years old, a statement of use is required when filing
More informationUNITARY PATENT PROTECTION (UPP) PACKAGE
UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION (UPP) PACKAGE LECCA & ASSOCIATES Ltd. August 1-2, 2014 Hong Kong, China SAR Objectives & Issues Creation of Unitary Patent (UP) Unitary Patent Court (UPC) A single harmonized
More informationIP: Patent law & prosecution
IP: Patent law & prosecution Tech Transfer course 2018 28 August 2018 Griet Den Herder, PhD, IP Manager Patent law & organisations International : Vienna convention: treaty following principle of good
More informationSFIR / AIPPI 31 August Amendment of patent claims in France. Partial revocation of a claim by Court (only possibility until January 1, 2009)
Amendment of patent claims in France SFIR / AIPPI 31 August 2009 Isabelle Romet Paris Lyon Content 1. 2. Partial revocation of a claim by Court (only possibility until January 1, 2009) Ex-parte limitation
More informationPROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
PROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION The idea of a Community Patent, a single patent that can be enforced throughout the European Union (EU), is hardly new. The original
More informationDevelopments towards a unitary European patent system
Developments towards a unitary European patent system Nikolaus Thumm Chief Economist European Patent Office Paris, 28 November 2012 The European patent system in a nutshell The European Patent Convention
More informationOUTLINE AND EVALUATION OF THE DOUBLE TRACK SYSTEM IN JAPAN--- INVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS AND INVALIDITY TRIALS AT JPO
OUTLINE AND EVALUATION OF THE DOUBLE TRACK SYSTEM IN JAPAN--- INVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS AND INVALIDITY TRIALS AT JPO November 18,2016 Chief Judge Ryuichi Shitara Intellectual
More informationQUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FD1 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 66%
QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FD1 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 66% Question 1 Because the subject matter of the invention relates to military technology there is an obligation on the applicant not to disclose
More informationPatent Disputes. Guide for Patent Litigation in Germany.
Patent Disputes Guide for Patent Litigation in Germany 2016 www.preubohlig.de Content The Guide offers a rough overview of the relevant German patent litigation frameworks, as an aid for US or international
More informationPRE-GRANT OPPOSITION POST-GRANT OPPOSITION
OPPOSITION TYPES OF OPPOSITION PRE-GRANT OPPOSITION [SEC 25(1)] POST-GRANT OPPOSITION [SEC. 25 (2)] REVOCATION[SECs 64 TO 66] GROUNDS FOR OPPOSITION UNDER SECTIONS 25(1) & 25 (2) That the applicant for
More informationSpeed of processing at the EPO. Timely delivery of quality products
Speed of processing at the EPO Timely delivery of quality products John Beatty EPO September 18 th, 2017 Agenda Early certainty: 6 / 12 / 15 Accelerating & shortening the procedure: Your choices! Quality
More informationUS Patent Reform Act (AIA) Selected amendments of the AIA compared to European Regulations
US Patent Reform Act () Selected amendments of the compared to European Regulations Andreas Holzwarth-Rochford Jones Day PatPros meeting - January 20, 2012 first-inventor-to-file./. first-to-file Similarities
More informationPatent reform package - Frequently Asked Questions
EUROPEAN COMMISSION MEMO Brussels, 11 December 2012 Patent reform package - Frequently Asked Questions I. Presentation of the unitary patent package 1. What is the 'unitary patent package'? The 'unitary
More informationThe potential impact of Brexit on the European Patenting landscape
The potential impact of Brexit on the European Patenting landscape 1 November 2016-1 - Europe Economics is registered in England No. 3477100. Registered offices at Chancery House, 53-64 Chancery Lane,
More informationRevision of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal. First public draft online user consultation. 1 February 2018
Revision of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal First public draft online user consultation 1 February 2018 Article 1 Business distribution and composition (1) The Presidium referred to in Rule
More informationGERMAN UTILITY MODEL THE UNDERRATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT DATE: WEDNESDAY 12 NOVEMBER 2014 LOCATION: GLASGOW, UK
GERMAN UTILITY MODEL THE UNDERRATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT DATE: WEDNESDAY 12 NOVEMBER 2014 LOCATION: GLASGOW, UK INTRODUCTION In Germany the utility model is an unexamined, technical IP right having
More informationUnitary patent and Unified Patent Court: the proposed framework
Unitary patent and Unified Patent Court: the proposed framework The adoption of two key regulations late last year have paved the way for the long-awaited unitary patent and Unified Patent Court By Rainer
More informationRaising 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 informationThe Unitary Patent & The Unified Patent Court IP Key & Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London 8 November 2016
The Unitary Patent & The IP Key & Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London 8 November 2016 Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association) Member of
More informationTopic 1: Challenges and Options in Substantive Patent Examination. Lutz Mailänder Head, International Cooperation on Examination and Training Section
Topic 1: Challenges and Options in Substantive Patent Examination Lutz Mailänder Head, International Cooperation on Examination and Training Section Pretoria 14 March 2016 Agenda Challenges of small and
More information2015 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 informationINVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS IN JAPAN. July 25,2014 Chief Judge Ryuichi Shitara Intellectual Property High Court
INVALIDITY DEFENSE IN PATENT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATIONS IN JAPAN July 25,2014 Chief Judge Ryuichi Shitara Intellectual Property High Court INVALIDATION TRIAL AT JPO Article 123of the Patent Act (2) Any person
More informationPreliminary set of provisions for the Rules of procedure of the Unified Patent Court
27 January 2012 Preliminary set of provisions for the Rules of procedure of the Unified Patent Court Status 1. First draft dated 29 May 2009 discussed in expert meetings on 5 June and 19 June 2009 2. Second
More informationTREATY SERIES 2008 Nº 4. Act revising the Convention on the Grant of European Patents
TREATY SERIES 2008 Nº 4 Act revising the Convention on the Grant of European Patents Done at Munich on 29 November 2000 Ireland s instrument of accession deposited with the Government of Germany on 16
More informationQ&A: Appeal and Trial Procedures
Q&A Appeal and Trial Procedures *The content is the same as the Q&A on Overview of Appeals and Trials (Procedures Chapter). 1. Appeal Against an Examiner s Decision of Refusal 2. Trial for Correction 3.
More informationthe UPC will have jurisdiction over certain European patents (see box The unitary patent and the UPC: a recap ).
THE UNITARY PATENT CENTRAL ENFORCEMENT OF PATENTS IN EUROPE In the second of a two-part series, Susie Middlemiss, Adam Baldwin and Laura Balfour of Slaughter and May examine the structure and procedures
More informationThe EU Unitary Patent System in its current state. EU-Japan Policy Seminar 22 November 2016
The EU Unitary Patent System in its current state EU-Japan Policy Seminar 22 November 2016 in force since January 20, 2013 Overview on the Unitary Patent System The European Patent with unitary effect
More informationJETRO 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 informationIP Litigation in Life Sciences Germany 2016
IP Litigation in Life Sciences Germany 2016 Dr. Jan B. Krauss, Patent Attorney, Munich 2016 WIPO Conference Life Sciences Dispute Resolution Agenda The current landscape of life sciences enforcement in
More information1. The Japan Patent Office (JPO) fee schedule is changed, effective from. 2. The post-grant opposition system is abolished, and the invalidation trial
2003 AMENDMENT TO JAPAN PATENT LAW April 1, 2004; The Japan Patent Law was amended in 2003. The major changes are: 1. The Japan Patent Office (JPO) fee schedule is changed, effective from 2. The post-grant
More information