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

Changes to accelerated prosecution (PACE) at the EPO

epologoThe EPO offers a number of mechanisms for expediting the grant procedure. As noted in the EPO’s November 2015 notice these include:

  • PACE (see below for changes)
  • Waiving the confirm to proceed notification under rule 70(2) EPC
  • Waiving the rules 161/162 EPC communication
  • Waiving a further communication under rule 71(3) EPC
  • Early entry into the European phase

During post grant proceedings the above EPO Notice also highlights accelerated processing of oppositions where infringement proceedings have been instituted and accelerated processing before the Boards of Appeal.

From 1 January 2016, (Happy New Year everyone!), the EPO has tweaked the operation of the PACE programme slightly. Full details can be found in the EPO’s PACE Notice dated 30 November 2015. The highlights are as follows: (more…)

2015’s Top 10 Posts on IPcopy

Yeah, of course I'm excited it's Christmas....

Yeah, of course I’m excited it’s Christmas….

As we contemplate the possibility that another recipe from “101 Things to do with Cold Turkey” is going to be needed to shift the last of the Christmas food, we thought we’d take a quick look back at the top 10 most read posts that we published this year. (more…)

USPTO: Beyond the Final Frontier (What happens after a Final Office Action)

USThe US patent prosecution process can become a bit confusing once the application reaches the “final” Office Action stage. The “final” nature of the Office Action (OA) means that the Examiner has rejected the claims at least two times. However, it is by no means the end of the process with after-final amendments, appeal and a request for continued examination often being on the cards.

The various options available to the applicant were the subject of a recent webinar that IPcopy attended and what follows is a summary of the webinar (any errors clearly being the work of the author of this post!). (more…)

UPC: Double patenting, Changes to Patents Act, Opt-out Register UI & Taskforce update

IMG_8533-1Christmas is nearly here and barring any end of the year UPC ratifications we’re not expecting too much to happen on the unitary patent and Unified Patent Court until next year. Before Christmas arrives however here’s a quick update: (more…)

Trade Secrets

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAA trade secret is a formula, practice, process, design, instrument, pattern, commercial method, or compilation of information which is not generally known or reasonably ascertainable by others, and by which a business can obtain an economic advantage over competitors or customers. The scope of trade secrets is virtually unlimited. (more…)

EU Commission: unitary patent concerns; IP insurance and unitary SPCs

IMG_8533-1The European Commission website provides something of a byzantine navigational challenge so IPcopy is extremely grateful to Martin Chatel for pointing us in the direction of the Commission staff working document “A Single Market Strategy for Europe – Analysis and Evidence” which discusses the unitary patent package. (more…)

Alice in USPTOland

USFollowing the Alice Corp v CLS Bank decision in June 2014 the USPTO’s position with respect to patent eligible subject matter has changed.

But having swallowed the red pill just how deep does the rabbit hole go? What is and what is not patent eligible subject matter in the US? (more…)

Patent Box Consultation: closing date for comments 4 December 2015

BoxAs previously reported on IPcopy, HM Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs are currently running a consultation on proposed changes to the UK Patent Box scheme. The consultation runs until this Friday (4 December 2015) and the consultation document, which  includes some background on the existing Patent Box scheme, can be found here.

The main change proposed in the consultation is the use of R&D expenditure as a proxy for “substantial activities”. A so called “nexus fraction” will then be calculated in which a company’s own R&D expenditure on the IP in question plus any subcontracted R&D expenditure to an unrelated party (these figures together forming the “qualifying expenditure”) will be divided by the qualifying expenditure plus any R&D subcontracted to a related party plus acquisition costs.

Companies who have developed their own IP are likely to have a nexus fraction of close to “1” and so will essentially be unaffected by the revised rules. However, company’s which have acquired IP will see nexus fractions of <1 which will therefore reduce the income which qualifies for the new Patent Box.

Although the main change is the use of R&D expenditure as a proxy for substantial activities it is noted that the proposed changes will also have some other fairly noticeable effects, namely: (more…)

UPC Update (November 2015, part II): SPCs, US interest and UK Taskforce

IMG_8533-0In today’s update we highlight an article relating to Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) and the UPC and an article that discusses the interest of US applicants for unitary patent protection. We also have the most recent update from the UK’s UPC Taskforce. (more…)

IP licensing

AgreementWhat is an IP licence?

An IP licence in its simplest form is an agreement where an IP owner (the Licensor) permits another person (the Licensee) to engage in activities that, in the absence of the IP Licence Agreement, would infringe the Licensor’s legal rights attaching to the IP. In return the Licensee pays the Licensor a fee or confers some other benefit. It is a written agreement that gives rights to do something that would otherwise be an infringement of the IP rights of someone else.

A typical case may involve the Licensor granting the Licensee the right to make and sell patented product perhaps worldwide and for the life of the patent(s). The Licensee agrees to pay the Licensor a royalty, defined as a percentage of Net Sales Value. The Licensor agrees not to make or sell patented product itself nor permit any 3rd Party to do so. (more…)

Keltie on Twitter

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

Join 1,636 other followers

Blog Stats

  • 213,781 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,636 other followers