Posted: May 20th, 2021
European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, G 1/21 – Interlocutory Decision of May 17, 2021, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg The referral case G 1/21 in which the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) has to decide on the question whether oral proceedings can be held as VICO without the consent of all […]
READ MOREPosted: March 17th, 2021
Technical Board of Appeal 3.5.02, decision of March 12, 2021, case T 1807/15 – Oral proceedings in form of a videoconference, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg The referred question reads as follows: Is the conduct of oral proceedings in the form of a videoconference compatible with the right to oral proceedings as enshrined […]
READ MOREPosted: March 10th, 2021
European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, G 1/19 – Pedestrian simulation, decision of March 10, 2021, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg Almost eight months after the oral proceedings, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) issued its decision in the case pedestrian simulation. The EBA rephrases and limits question 2 and answers the […]
READ MOREPosted: November 6th, 2020
European Patent Office, Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.08, case T 844/18 – CRISPR-Cas/BROAD INSTITUTE In the beginning of this year, the decision of Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.08 of January 16, 2020 was reported, confirming the consistent practice of the EPO applying the „all applicants“ approach, meaning that the applicant of a European patent claiming […]
READ MOREPosted: May 14th, 2020
European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, G 3/19, opinion of May 14, 2020, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg Overruling its previous decisions Tomatoes II (G 2/12) and Broccoli II (G 2/13) issued in 2015, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) holds that plants and animals exclusively obtained by essentially biological processes are […]
READ MOREPosted: March 20th, 2020
On an international level, the TRIPS Agreement sets out various enforcement procedures that right holders can rely on to protect their IP rights. In the EU, the Enforcement Directive sets out measures as well as remedies the courts may order in IP cases. However, the manner in which enforcement is carried out differs from country […]
READ MOREPosted: February 19th, 2020
High Point SARL v. KPN B.V., Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 14 February 2020, Case No. ECLI:NL:HR:2020:258 Is it contrary to Articles 68 and 105a-105c EPC that local rules of due process prevent that a centrally limited patent is invoked in proceedings? Interpretation of Articles 68 and 105a-105c EPC according to Articles 31 and 32 […]
READ MOREPosted: February 7th, 2020
Proceedings Before the European Patent Office, A Practical Guide to Success in Opposition and Appeal, Second Edition, Elgar Practical Guides Marcus O. Müller, Chairman of Board 3.3.02, European Patent Office, Munich/Haar, Germany and Cees A.M. Mulder, European Patent Attorney and Professor of European Patent Law in a Global Context, Maastricht University, the Netherlands The second […]
READ MOREPosted: January 29th, 2020
EPO, Receiving Section, decisions of January 27, 2020 in consolidated proceedings on applications EP 18 275 163 and EP 18 275 174 Applicant Dr. Stephen Thaler filed two European patent applications. In the request for grant Form, the field for indicating the inventor was left empty. In reply to the invitation to designate the inventor(s), […]
READ MOREPosted: January 24th, 2020
The 20th edition of National law relating to the EPC is now online. “With its “National law relating to the EPC” booklet, the EPO aims to provide European patent applicants and proprietors, and all others concerned with the European patent system, with a concise guide to the most important provisions and requirements of the relevant […]
READ MORE