EPLAW PATENT BLOG

EPO – The independence of the Boards of Appeal

Posted: February 2nd, 2015

The independence of the Boards of Appeal  – Responsibilities of the Administrative Council, by Michael Wallinger, Wallinger Ricker Schlotter Tostmann This Blog has recently published an open letter  of the European Patent Lawyers Association (EPLAW) to the Delegations of the Administrative Council (AC) of the EPO. EPLAW joined the chorus of patent professionals expressing their […]

READ MORE

EPO – access to patent protection in Morocco via a European patent application

Posted: January 21st, 2015

The European patent system exceeds the boundaries of Europe – access to patent protection in Morocco via a European patent application The agreement on the validation of European patent applications and granted European patents in Morocco signed in December 2010 has been implemented by the Moroccan authorities. The President of the EPO and the Moroccan […]

READ MORE

EPO: Judicial Independence letter from the EPLAW President

Posted: December 29th, 2014

Download Eplaw letter 29 December 2014.pdf

READ MORE

EPO – The effect of death and resurrection on opposition and appeal clarified by the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA)

Posted: December 19th, 2014

EPO, G 1/13, EBA, decision of 25 November 2014 – Fischer-Tropsch Catalysts/SASOL TECHNOLOGY II The contested patent was opposed by Formalities Bureau Limited (FBL). The opponent’s representative appears in the UK Company Register in the Section “Directors and Secretaries” of FBL. During the opposition proceedings FBL was struck off the Register. The opposition proceedings were […]

READ MORE

EPO – Letters to AC from Floyd, Van Peursem & others

Posted: December 11th, 2014

Letter from the RT Hon LJ Floyd and Advocate General to the Dutch Supreme Court Robert van Peursem to the Administrative Council of the EPO: "We, as external members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office, wish to express our extreme concern at the action of the President of the European […]

READ MORE

EPO – Concerns about judicial independence

Posted: December 8th, 2014

Concerns about judicial independence at the EPO, by Tilman Müller-Stoy, Bardehle Pagenberg "Dear Mr. Ernst: I first would like to apologize for my somewhat unusual manner in addressing you in your capacity as the German representative of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation.I am deeply concerned about the judicial independence at the EPO […]

READ MORE

EPO – TBA reconsiders the standard of proof required for internet disclosures

Posted: November 18th, 2014

Pointsec Mobile Technologies AB (Appellant Opponent) v. Bouygues Telecom (Respondent Patent Proprietor), Technical Board of Appeal 3.5.06, 21 May 2014, Case No. T 0286/10-3.5.06 "Sécurisation d'un accès à une ressource numérique/BOUYGUES", reported by Stefan V. Steinbrener, Bardehle Pagenberg Technical Board of Appeal 3.5.06 reconsiders the standard of proof required for establishing public availability of internet […]

READ MORE

EPO – TBA denies patentability of a programming language

Posted: October 17th, 2014

Technical Board of Appeal 3.5.06 denies patentability of a programming language. The Board ruled that the definition and provision of a programming language per se does not contribute to the solution of a technical problem, even if the choice of how it is expressed serves to reduce the mental effort of a programmer. Renner, Peter […]

READ MORE

UK – Actavis v Pharmacia (Part 2)

Posted: July 30th, 2014

Actavis Group PTC EHF v Pharmacia LLC, Patents Court, 24 July 2014, [2014] EWHC 2611 (Pat), Arnold J As recently reported on the EPLAW Patent Blog (here), the English Patents Court had refused to stay validity proceedings relating to the UK designation of a European patent whilst opposition proceedings were on-going at the EPO, despite […]

READ MORE

EPO – TBA confirms patentability of an electrical signal

Posted: July 30th, 2014

Schiller Medical (Applicant), Technical Board of Appeal 3.4.01, EPO, 11 February 2014, Case No. T 533/09 Technical Board of Appeal 3.4.01 confirms the patentability of an electrical signal. The Board held that under the EPC the notion of invention was not linked to "tangible" (in the sense of "material") subject-matter. Electrical signals, the intensity of which could […]

READ MORE