Bubbles Burst
Comparative advertising rules (somewhat) clarified*
By APLF Member Firm Kilburn & Strode, London U.K.
European law has developed two distinct strands of consumer protection:
(i) trade mark law, which generally aims at preventing the mischief of confusing consumers by different traders employing similar marks for similar goods and services, and
(ii) law regulating advertising in which a trader […]

Just Because You Managed to Slip Something Past It The First Time, You May Not Have Won!*
By APLF Member Firm Kilburn & Strode, London U.K.
In an earlier appeal, T984/00, from the Examination Division’s decision to refuse the application, an amendment had been found allowable as not adding subject-matter and the patent had been granted in […]

The UK Law Further Clarified*
By APLF Member Firm Kilburn & Strode, London U.K.
The UK Court of Appeal panel hearing this second-instance appeal included Lord Hoffmann, our most distinguished IP judge, which is unusual because he normally sits in the House of Lords, a court of third instance. It is assumed that he did so in […]

A Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) pilot program between IP Australia and the USPTO commenced on 14 April 2008. The pilot program will run for one year and may be extended if successful or terminated early if found to be unviable.
The PPH is a bilateral initiative familiar to US patent practitioners, whereby an application determined […]

The London Agreement, which allows for reduced translation costs upon validation of a granted European patent in some national states, was originally expected to come into force in either February 2008 or March 2008. Any patent having a date of grant after the date of entry into force of the London Agreement benefits from the […]

The Administrative Council of the EPO announced on 14 December 2007 important new fee changes.
From 1st April 2008, an excess claim fee will be due for each claim in excess of 15 and the fee will be 200 euro per claim. This is a fairly large increase from the current 45 euro per claim in […]

A new test for inventive step has been laid out by Jacob LJ in Pozzoli vs BDMO. The old “Windsurfing” test (Set out by Oliver LJ in Windsurfing v. Tarbur Marine [1985] FSR 59) has been redefined and re-ordered. The steps of the new test are as follows:
(1) (a) Identify the notional “person skilled in […]

The basic features of the service
The UK Patent Office (now known as the UK Intellectual Property Office) introduced its opinions service on 01 October 2005.
The service allows any person (including the proprietor) to request the Patent Office to issue an opinion in respect of a granted patent regarding:
i) Whether a particular act constitutes, or […]

The London Agreement was concluded on 17 October 2000 with the aim of creating a reduction in the cost of post grant translations of European patents.
The Agreement was readily ratified by a number of member states including the United Kingdom and Germany, but there was a delay in France who had to ratify the Agreement […]

The Consolidated Cases Of Tafas V. Dudas And Smithkline Beecham Corp. V.
Dudas
On Wednesday October 31, 2007, Judge James C. Cacheris, sitting in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, delivered perhaps the
most significant ruling in U.S. patent law this year (including the Supreme
Court’s decision in KSR Inc. v. Teleflex Int’l. Inc.). In […]