Home » Posts tagged 'unitary patent'
Tag Archives: unitary patent
I was fortunate enough to attend last week’s seminar of the Westminster Legal Policy Forum in London. An overview of the seminar will appear on IPcopy later. This post will instead focus on one of the keynote addresses given by Neil Feinson, Director of International Policy, IPO and UK Representative, UPC Preparatory Committee.
“A cross-border, public sector IT Project. What could possibly go wrong?” * (more…)
The CJEU court diary has just been updated* to show that the Advocate General’s opinion relating to the Spanish challenges to the unitary patent package (in cases C-146/13 and C-147/13) is now scheduled for 18 November 2014.
An early Christmas present beckons for either Spain or the EPO…..
Back in July we reported that although there was a political will in the Czech Republic to ratify the Unified Patent Court Agreement, there was likely to be a delay until an economic impact assessment could be carried out. Such an assessment in turn could not happen until details of the renewal fees, court fees etc. were published.
On Monday we posted an update on the progress of the two actions before the CJEU from Spain in respect of the Unitary Patent Package (short summary: the Advocate General’s decision has been delayed). We subsequently received a notice from Dr Ingve Stjerna relating to his latest paper on the unitary patent (Regular readers will be aware that Dr Stjerna has written a number of articles on the unitary patent system which can be accessed here). (more…)
As has been widely covered, Spain is challenging the Unitary Patent Package via two actions at the CJEU ( C-146/13 and C-147/13 against the European Parliament and the European Council). In what has been a relatively quiet few months for news relating to the unitary patent and the unified patent court, IPcopy was looking forward to 21 October 2014 which was when the Advocate General was expected to publish the AG’s opinion on the two Spanish actions.
However, the IPO’s monthly newsletter IP Connect is now reporting that publication of the AG’s opinion will not take place in October and no revised date has been given (see page 5 of the October IP Connect). What does this mean? Perhaps the AG is just busy but maybe there are issues with the opinion and its potential impact on the Unitary Patent Package or perhaps the EPO’s role in the system. We’ll keep an eye out for further news on this issue but if anyone knows more please feel free to chime in below in the comments section.
Mark Richardson 6 October 2014
Before the summer recess the Unified Patent Court Preparatory Committee ran a consultation on the European Patent Litigation Certificate (EPLC). Regular readers will recall that this certificate links to Article 48 of the UPC Agreement which states that parties may either be represented by lawyers authorised to practice before a court of a Contracting Member State or by European Patent Attorneys who have “appropriate qualifications such as a European Patent Litigation Certificate”.
The consultation closed on 25 July and, according to the latest Preparatory Committee roadmap, a revised version of the EPLC rules is expected early 2015. In the meantime one of our Twitter followers (thank you Guillaume S./@EPpatent) kindly pointed us at the Bristows UPC website where a few of the responses to the EPLC consultation are hosted.
Given that these responses include representatives from patent attorneys and also from lawyers we thought it might be fun to see how far apart the responses were! (more…)
The Intellectual Property Act 2014 received Royal Assent on 14 May 2014 and makes a number of changes to intellectual property (IP) law in the UK. The provisions of the Intellectual Property Act start to come into force from 1 October 2014. In this post we take a look at the UKIPO’s Patents Opinions Service. (more…)
The Preparatory Committee for the Unified Patent Court has updated their website to indicate that a number of experts have been invited to join an Expert Panel to provide informal advice to the various work streams that exist in the UPC roadmap. The UPC website has also been updated with a new roadmap.
I wasn’t planning on writing again on the possible impact of the Scottish Referendum on intellectual property rights unless there was a “Yes” vote. The polls however seemed to have moved recently from “probably No” to “Dave? It’s squeaky bum time”. Additionally a couple of us here at IPcopy have wondered whether a “Yes” vote (i.e. a vote to break up the UK) might have a greater impact than previously thought on the Unitary Patent Package. Essentially, we’ve been considering a Scottish variant of the Malta problem which has previously been discussed on this blog – what I’m now going to refer to as the Scottish Situation. (more…)