The Opposition Division upheld a patent in a decision finding novelty over D1 and inventive step over D1 in combination with D3 or D4. The opponent filed a statement of grounds of appeal containing a…
This decision deals with the scope of the obligation of a plaintiff to concentrate actions in one case if these are directed against the same defendant regarding the same infringing device, but based…
In case of actual or potential discrepancies between claim language and the patent description which might allow a broader interpretation the Supreme Court confirms that the claim may not be…
The UK Court held that three of Cephalon's patents relating to the drug modafinil, used to treat sleep disorders such as narcolepsy, were not infringed and were invalid for lack of inventive step…
The Court of Appeal discusses and builds on its previous case law on patentability regarding the issue of whether the subject matter is considered a technical invention. The Court emphasizes that it…
A method claim comprising a step of "providing a donor flow channel for conveying fluid to and from a donor" was found to be excluded from patentability as treatment by surgery and therapy. The Board…
Faced with a claim directed at a method for determining airway pressure levels, the Board isolated a step from the claim that required changing the airway pressure of an artificial ventilator to…
If a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) should have been denied (or granted with limited scope), because the six month application period following the date of first marketing approval has…
The Court of Appeal Duesseldorf held that, provided that the alleged infringer proves a legitimate interest in confidentiality, the presentation of the expert opinion to the patentee itself depends…
