Heli PihlajamaaLondon, 20.05.2015Director Patent Law (5.2.1) Clarity - Article 84 EPC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Should the names of the States be included in Article 6ter of the Paris Convention?
Advertisements

> AOAIOIP September 9, 2004, Cleveland September 10, Cincinnati EPO oppositions Christophe Saam.
Utility and Written Description Steve Kunin Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy Esther Kepplinger Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations.
The German Experience: Patent litigation and nullification cases
Drafting Claims and Patent Specifications for Chemical Inventions: A European Perspective Andrew G. Smith.
Protection of Computer Software and Databases Arkadiusz Kwapisz, Examiner Patent Examination Department Patent Office of the Republic of Poland Software-implemented.
1 1 1 AIPLA American Intellectual Property Law Association USPTO Updates Including Glossary Pilot Program Chris Fildes Fildes & Outland, P.C. IP Practice.
Invention Spotting – Identifying Patentable Inventions Martin Vinsome June 2012.
OVERVIEW OF PATENTS: TRIPS and US PATENT EXAMINATION
D ANIELS B AKER Introduction to Patent Law Doug Yerkeson University of Cincinnati Senior Design Class April 6, 2005.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 28, 2007 Patent - Enablement.
102/103 Prior Art Patent Law Sources of 102/103 Art 35 USC 103: “differences between subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art”
1 Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) A United States Perspective Stephen G. Kunin Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy United.
A comparative analysis with a harmonizing perspective A RT. 123(2) EPC AND US W RITTEN D ESCRIPTION 1 © AIPLA 2015 Enrica Bruno - Steinfl & Bruno LLP.
1 United States Patent and Trademark Office Revised PCT International Search and Preliminary Examination Guidelines Biotech/ChemPharm Customer Partnership.
Practical tips and Strategies for US applicants before EPO
Heli Pihlajamaa June 2015Director Patent Law Update on electronic tools of the EPO – notification, filing and fee payment.
Meyerlustenberger Rechtsanwälte − Attorneys at Lawwww.meyerlustenberger.ch European Patent Law and Litigation Guest Lecture, Health and Intellectual Property.
Utility Requirement in Japan Makoto Ono, Ph.D. Anderson, Mori & Tomotsune Website:
J.A.Kemp & Co. London Munich Oxford. FICPI ABC MEETING 2007 EPC 2000 Alan M. Senior 30 May 2007.
Dr. Michael Berger, European Patent Attorney © Michael Berger Intellectual Property (IP): Patents for Inventions.
Focus on China: Successful Preparation and Prosecution Samson G. Yu Kangxin Partners, P.C. Beijing, China
Patent Protection in Europe
Navigating Your Inhalation Patents Through the European Patent Office Presented at: RDD Europe 2015 Respiratory Drug Delivery Date: May 7, 2015 Presented.
Categories of Claims in the Field of CII Edoardo Pastore European Patent Office Torino, October 2011.
European Patent Applicants Filing in China Common Mistakes Zheng Li Zhongzi Law Office September, 2014.
Like.com vs. Ugmode Prosecution history of patent *** CONFIDENTIAL *** Prepared by Ugmode, Inc.
1 LAW DIVISION PATENT DIVISION TRADEMARK & DESIGN DIVISION ACCOUNTING & AUDITING DIVISION YUASA AND HARA LAW, PATENT, TRADEMARK & DESIGN and ACCOUNTING.
Patent Application Procedures in Europe by Dr. Ulla Allgayer Patent Attorney in Munich Germany.
Seminar Industrial Property Protection Prague, 4 June 2003 Patent Protection in Europe Heidrun Krestel Liaison Officer Member States Co-operation Programmes.
July 18, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December 10,
Appeals in patent examination and opposition in Germany Karin Friehe Judge, Federal Patent Court, Munich, Germany.
Post Grant Review to be introduced in Japan JPAA International Activities Center Fujiko Shibata January 29, 2013 AIPLA Mid-Winter Institute IP Practice.
Intellectual Property Law © 2007 IBM Corporation EUPACO 2 – The European Patent Conference 16 May 2007 Patent Quality Roger Burt IBM Europe.
Disembodied Embodiments: Medical Device Strategy for PCT and Foreign Applications Bruce D. Sunstein Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP Boston
© 2004 VOSSIUS & PARTNER Opposition in the Procedural System by Dr. Johann Pitz AIPPI Hungary, June 2 – 4, 2004 Kecskemét.
Drafting of Claims - The Tailor’s Scissors Edoardo Pastore European Patent Office Torino, October 2011.
6.1 Chapter 6 Patents © 2003 by West Legal Studies in Business/A Division of Thomson Learning.
6.1 Chapter 6 Patents © 2003 by West Legal Studies in Business/A Division of Thomson Learning.
Revisions to Japanese Patent Law Before the law was revised, a Divisional Applications could not be filed after a Notice of Allowance 2.
FY09 Restriction Petition Update; Comparison of US and National Stage Restriction Practice Julie Burke TC1600 Quality Assurance Specialist
Chris Fildes FILDES & OUTLAND, P.C. IP Practice in Japan Committee Pre-Meeting AIPLA Annual Meeting, October 20, 2015 USPTO PILOT PROGRAMS 1 © AIPLA 2015.
1 EPC 2000 The London Agreement New Matter Objections & Cost Saving Ideas for US Practitioners Robin Browne.
Claims Proposed Rulemaking Main Purposes É Applicant Assistance to Improve Focus of Examination n Narrow scope of initial examination so the examiner is.
Oppositions, Appeals and Oral Proceedings at the EPO Michael Williams.
Patentable Subject Matter Donald M. Cameron. 2 Patents: The Bargain Public: gets use of invention after patent expires Inventor/Owner: gets limited monopoly.
1 Patent Claim Interpretation under Art. 69 EPC – Should prosecution history be used to interpret the patent? presented at Fordham 19th Annual Conference.
Conference on Intellectual Property Rights for SMEs organized by TAIEX in co-operation with WIPO and the Turkish Patent Institute Istanbul, 10.
PATENTS, INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS Presented By: Navdeep World Trade Organization.
European Patent Attorneys Chartered Patent Attorneys Trade Mark Attorneys Practical approaches to appeals before the European Patent Office Paul Chapman.
Patents and the Patenting Process Patents and the Inventor’s role in the Patenting Process.
Oppositions, Appeals and Oral Proceedings at the EPO.
. The criterion of inventive step. Definition of Inventive step Sometimes, it is the idea of using established techniques to do something which no one.
NA, Yanghee International Application Team Korean Intellectual Property Office National Phase of PCT international applications April 26,
1 TOPIC III - PATENT INVALIDATION PROCEDURES EU-CHINA WORKSHOP ON THE CHINESE PATENT LAW HARBIN, SEPTEMBER 2008 Dr. Gillian Davies.
Patent CP and national laws Dr Ali Al-Fatlawi. To what extent may the patent rules be applied to CPs? By investigating the legal and judicial position.
M a i w a l d P a t e n t a n w a l t s G m b H München Düsseldorf Hamburg New York Page 1 The patentability of business methods and software-related inventions.
A CP patent in European policy Dr Ali Al-fatlawi.
Yuichi Watanabe Osha Liang LLP January 26, 2016 Practice Tips: Prosecution of Japan-origin US applications 1 © AIPLA 2015.
Preparing a Patent Application
Patentability of AI related inventions
Lord Neuberger in Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] RPC 21, para. 57.
Comparing subject matter eligibility in us and eu
Preparing a Patent Application
Upcoming changes in the European Patent Office practice on allowing claim amendments in pending patent applications (Article 123(2) EPC) Christof Keussen.
US Patent Applications
Claim drafting strategies when filing a European patent application or entering the European phase of a PCT-application Christof Keussen
Trilateral Seminar of the French, German and Polish Groups of AIPPI
Influence of AI creations on the IP rules
Claim construction and associated problems in France
Presentation transcript:

Heli PihlajamaaLondon, Director Patent Law (5.2.1) Clarity - Article 84 EPC

European Patent Office 1 Clarity Article 84 EPC The claims shall define the matter for which protection is sought. They shall be clear and concise and be supported by the description. 2 Article 101(2) EPCArticle 101(3) EPC If the Opposition Division is of the opinion that at least one ground for opposition prejudices the maintenance of the European patent, it shall revoke the patent. If the Opposition Division is of the opinion that, taking into consideration the amendments made by the proprietor of the European patent during the opposition proceedings, the patent and the invention to which it relates (b) do not meet the requirements of this Convention, it shall revoke the patent.

European Patent Office G 3/14 – Clarity 3 ExaminationOpposition w/ amendment* Invention  Novelty  Inventive Step  Industrial Applicability  Sufficiency of disclosure  Added subject- matter  Clarity   * amendments must be occasioned by a ground for opposition

European Patent Office G 3/14 – Clarity “ [T]he claims of the patent may be examined for compliance with the requirements of Article 84 EPC only when, and then only to the extent that the amendment introduces non-compliance with Article 84 EPC.” 4 “introducing” clarity problem =≠ creating new clarity problem bringing into light, highlighting, making visible, etc.

European Patent Office G 3/14 – Clarity 5 amendment “introduces” lack of clarity combination of subject-matter of previous independent claim with one (preferred) of several alternative embodiments previously contained in dependent claim  literal insertion of dependent claim into independent claim (=strike out original independent claim + write out previous dependent claim in full)  deletion of entire in/dependent claims  narrowing of scope of claim by deletion of wording  deletion of optional features from claim  insertion into independent claim of feature from dependent claim disconnecting it from other features may introduce insertion into claim of feature from description

European Patent Office Thank you for your attention! 6 Heli Pihlajamaa Director Patent Law (5.2.1) European Patent Office, Munich Tel: +49 (0)