Keltie LLP

Keltie LLP

K2 IP Limited

About IPcopy

IPcopy is an intellectual property related news site covering a wide variety of IP related news and issues. We will also take the odd lighthearted look at IP. Feel free to contact us via the details on the About Us page.

Disclaimer: Unless stated otherwise, the contributors to IPcopy (the "IPcopy writers") are patent and trade mark attorneys or patent and trade mark assistants at Keltie LLP or are network attorneys at K2 IP Limited. Guest contributors will be identified.

This news site is the personal site of the contributors and is not edited by the authors' employer in any way. From time to time however IPcopy may publish practice notes, legal updates and marketing news from Keltie LLP or K2 IP Limited. Any such posts will be clearly marked.

This news site is for information purposes only. Information posted to this news site is not legal advice and should not be taken as such. If you require IP related legal advice please contact your legal representative.

Archive

London Tech Week 2015 – Free IP clinics: Inventions, branding & design protection advice

LTW PartOfBanner_720x90px (more…)

Unitary patent renewal fees: revised proposal

IMG_8533A short while ago IPcopy reported on proposals from the EPO Select Committee in respect of the renewal fee levels for the unitary patent.

Readers may recall that the Select Committee proposed a unitary patent renewal fee structure comprising the EPO’s internal maintenance fees from years 2 to 5 (a new year 2 fee was proposed as part of the proposals), the renewal fees at a level equivalent to the sum of national renewal fees for years 10 and above and a bridging arrangement in years 6-9 between the amounts in the years 2 to 5 and 10+ regimes. Within this structure, two proposals were put forward, a TOP 4 proposal and a TOP 5 proposal (the latter of these having some concessions in the fees available for SMEs).

As reported elsewhere recently the EPO Select Committee has, following feedback, revised the unitary patent (UP) renewal fee proposals slightly. So, what’s changed? (more…)

Grace Periods: Patent Harmonisation report from UKIPO

The UKIPO website has published an interesting US and UK study on the subject of grace periods.

The report notes that around 30 countries in the world have a grace period (defined in the report as “A period of time, before a patent application for an invention is filed, in which the invention could be disclosed without its novelty being lost”) but that EPC states have no meaningful grace period to speak of.

A handy table summarising available grace periods around the world can be found in Annex 3 of the following report which is referenced in the UKIPO publication. (more…)

Who ya gonna call? (in case of Brexit)

IMG_8533-1Now that we’ve had the General Election in the UK and the Conservatives have returned to power on their own, it looks like we’ll be getting a referendum asking whether we should stay in the EU or leave (the “hokey-cokey” referendum).

Against this political backdrop IPcopy has become aware of half-heard rumours suggesting that the possibility of the UK exiting the EU could be used in the run-up to the referendum to suggest that UK based European Patent Attorneys are not a safe bet for patent applicants outside Europe. As the story goes, because the UK could be booted out of the EU, this would have some kind of knock on effect on the ability of UK-EPAs to represent effectively at the EPO.

IPcopy would like to point out to anyone that may have heard something similar that this is clearly a load of tosh. (more…)

Coke means Coca-Cola*

On 10 May 2010, Modern Industrial & Trading Investment Co. Ltd (“Mitico”) filed a CTM application for the food and drink classes, 29, 30 and 32, which included “cola flavoured aerated waters”.Cola1

On 14 October, Coca-Cola Company (“Coca Cola”) filed an opposition against the application based on four of its earlier figurative CTMs; (more…)

UPC update from the UK’s UPC Taskforce (May 2015)

Unified patent courtFollowing the outcome of the UK’s General Election the UK’s UPC Taskforce has awoken from its period of Purdah to provide another update on all things UPC. So here for your digestion is the news: (more…)

UPC – Court fees and recoverable costs – some more detail

Unified patent courtThe UPC Court fees consultation was launched on 8 May 2015 and runs until midnight on 31 July 2015. Comments are requested, preferably in English, to secretariat@unified-patent-court.org.

The consultation provides for a mixture of fixed and value based fees. There are also two proposals for amendment of Rule 370 (Court fees) of the Rules of Procedure along with a table of fees and a scale of ceilings for recoverable costs. (more…)

UPC Court Fees Consultation Now Available

Unified patent courtAs mentioned yesterday, the UPC Preparatory Committee has now published the consultation on UPC court fees and recoverable costs. The consultation document is available here and the consultation runs until 31 July 2015 (midnight).

The UPC website offers the following further information: (more…)

EQE Pre-Exam 2015 – Questions on cardboard cut out

epologo

[Update 11/5/15 – it appears from the comments on DeltaPatents results blog post that non-appealing candidates have also benefitted from the decision.]

IPcopy has just learned that the EQE Examination Board has sent out what appears to be a response letter to candidates who appealed their pre-exam results based on questions 15.2 and/or 17.3, rectifying their ‘fail’ decisions to passes. The letter means that the Examination Board has effectively accepted both true and false as correct for these questions where the main point of contention was whether the prior art disclosed that cardboard comprises wood fibres. However, this is not explicitly stated in the letter and, at time of writing, the marking scheme has not been updated. (more…)

UPC Court Fees Consultation launches 8 May 2015

IMG_8533-1The UPC Preparatory Committee met this week on 5 May (Turbo Tuesday) and the big piece of news from the meeting is that the consultation document in respect of for the court fees and recoverable costs for the Unified Patent Court is ready to launch. The written consultation will run from tomorrow 8 May 2015 for 12 weeks. This means that from tomorrow we should hopefully have some idea what the fee amounts in Rule 370 of the Rules of Procedure (see page 149-150) will look like. (more…)

Spain v the Unitary Patent – CJEU gives Unanimous Points Decision to the Unitary Patent System

IMG_8533Unless you’ve missed it somehow, INTA is on and the average patent attorney is probably feeling a little left out as emails and photos of the latest INTA party do the rounds. Well fear not patent attorney brethren because the unitary patent system has a lot going on today.

Yes, on a day that literally no-one (but me) is calling Turbo Tuesday, we can look forward to the CJEU’s judgments in C-146/13 and C-147/13 (Spain v the Unitary Patent: the rematch) and a packed Preparatory Committee meeting in which we expect the details surrounding the European Patent Litigators Certificate to be finalised and the consultation on the court fees for the Unified Patent Court to be given the go ahead.

The Spanish result is first up and while the judgments weren’t available at the time of writing available, a press release has been, well, released which dismisses both of Spain’s actions. [Update: the judgments are now available – C-146/13 and C-147/13] (more…)

Keltie on Twitter

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,328 other followers

Blog Stats

  • 169,357 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,328 other followers