EPLAW PATENT BLOG

EPO – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL ON THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD

Posted: July 27th, 2021

European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, R 5/19 – Violation of the right to be heard, decision of March 15, 2021, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg Filing a petition of review under Article 112a EPC is not a very promising exercise, considering that less than 7% of the petitions are successful with […]

READ MORE

EPO – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL ALLOWS VIDEOCONFERENCES WITHOUT CONSENT OF THE PARTIES IN THE PANDEMIC SITUATION

Posted: July 16th, 2021

European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, Order in case G 1/21 published on July 16, 2021 Reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg In a Press Communiqué of July 16, 2021 the Enlarged Board of Appeal published the order in case G 1/21, i.e. the answer to the question referred in T 1807/15. It […]

READ MORE

EPO – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL CONFIRMS PROHIBITION ON DOUBLE PATENTING

Posted: June 23rd, 2021

European Patent Office, Enlarged Board of Appeal, G 4/19 – Double patenting, decision of June 22, 2021 Reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg In its decision G 4/19, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) answers the questions referred in T 318/14, OJ EPO 2020, A104 as follows: 1. A European patent application can be […]

READ MORE

EPO – VIDEOCONFERENCES WITHOUT CONSENT OF ALL PARTIES – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL DECIDES ON OBJECTIONS FOR REASONS OF SUSPECTED PARTIALITY

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 MORE

EPO – Enlarged Board of Appeal asked to decide on the admissibility of conducting oral proceedings as videoconference without consent of the parties

Posted: 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 MORE

EPO – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL GIVES GUIDANCE ON THE PATENTABILITY OF COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SIMULATIONS

Posted: 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 MORE

EPO – Priorities from US provisionals – All applicants approach confirmed

Posted: 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 MORE

EPO – ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL MAKES A U-TURN ON THE PATENTABILITY OF PLANTS OBTAINED BY AN ESSENTIALLY BIOLOGICAL PROCESS

Posted: 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 MORE

EPO – Study: Patent enforcement in Europe

Posted: 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 MORE