A validation agreement between the European Patent Organisation and Georgia entered into force on January 15, 2024. Thus, it is now possible for European patent applications and patents granted by the EPO to be validated in the Republic of Georgia. For more details, see the EPO website.
BGH on damages (patent infringement)
A recent decision by the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) (decision of 14 November 2023 – X ZR 30/21 – cushioning conversion machine) deals with damages in patent infringement proceedings in Germany. An English translation of the decision was made available on LinkedIn by plaintiff’s representative (Müller-Stoy of Bardehle).
The German Federal Supreme Court held that damages, when calculated based on infringer’s profits, generally are to take into account all profits that are causally related to the infringement of the patent. This applies even when such profits are generated by tsale of consumables or other ancillary devices or services, which by themselves do not consitute an act of direct infringement (§ 9 German Patent Act) or contributory infringement (§ 10 German Patent Act). All that is required is that the infringer’s profits are causally related to the infringement. An example are consumables sold by the infringer as a result of the patent infringement; the profits are to be taken into account even when such consumables do not contribute to the technical effect of the patent and/or do not interact with the non-obvious features of the claim.
This decision can be expected to have major impact on patent litigation in Europe and will add to the attractiveness of Germany as a venue for patent litigation.
Claim construction at the UPC
In decision UPC_CFI_292/2023, the Local Division (LD) Munich of 20/12/2023, the UPC rejected a request for a preliminary injunction. According to the first headnote of the decision, claim amendments made during prosecution can aid the claim construction . In the decided case, the LD Munich was of the opinion that a claim amendment introduced during prosecution defined an original claim feature in greater specificity and, thus, had to be construed more narrowly than suggested by claimant.
In an article published on LinkedIn, a fellow German patent attorney remarked that he considers the first headnote of this decision to represent a significant change as compared to the national German claim construction practice. I don’t think that the decision of the LD Munich is a significant departure from German national practice. While German courts have traditionally not relied on file history estoppel, several decisions handed down by the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) in recent years – such as BGH decision of 14/06/2016 – X ZR 29/15 – Pemetrexed and BGH decision of 10/05/2011 – X ZR 16/09 – Okklusionsvorrichtung (“occlusion device”) – held that claim amendments made during prosecution can be a useful tool for claim construction. The decision by the LD Munich appears to be in line with this German national case law (which in itself represents a shift towards the national practice of other EPC contracting states that apply the principles of file history estoppel).
Santa-related Intellectual Property
The German Patent and Trademark Office provides a nice collection of season-related IP rights: “Santa Claus patents, brands, designs“.
Wishing you all a wonderful christmas!
Christmas-season innovations
Seen in the Upper Palatinate when visiting my parents (also for Christmas preparations, but without convertible).
UPC trends
Juve Patent has published an interesting article (“Is the UPC trending towards bifurcation, but with a twist?”), which discusses initial trends of how the UPC deals with infringement actions and counterclaims for revocation
EPO Deep Tech Finder
The EPO has deployed its Deep Tech Finder tool. The Deep Tech Finder is a tool for finding investment-ready European startups that have patent applications at the EPO.
More information is available at the EPO’s FAQ page.
Bidding farewell to the EPO’s 10-day-rule
The EPO’s 10-day-rule will be abandoned from 1 November 2023. A safeguard mechanism will be effective in case a document is received late (more than 7 days late), with the burden of proof in case of disputed notifications being with the EPO. The new regulation applies to documents notified on or after 1 November 2023. See OJ EPO 2023, A29 for more details and some examples.
Enlarged Board of Appeal on transfer of priority right
The recent decisionby the Enlarged Board of Appeal G1/22 and G2/22 has made it easier to demonstrate a valid transfer of priority right. This is good news for patent applicants and patentees who may have struggled with the previous requirements for demonstrating a valid transfer. According to the EPO’s summary of the key considerations, “entitlement to priority is presumed to exist if the formal requirements for claiming priority are fulfilled. This presumption is justified because (i) all parties involved normally have an interest that an application may benefit from a priority right, (ii) there are no formal requirements for the transfer of priority rights, and (iii) the applicant of the priority application has to provide support to the applicant claiming priority (e.g. by providing unpublished documents).”
However, it is important to note that the time of transfer must still pre-date the subsequent filing. This means that while the process of demonstrating a valid transfer may be easier, the timing of the transfer is still crucial. More details can be found in the many comments that were already published on these decisions. See, e.g., the DeltaPatents Blog on decisions G1/22 and G2/22.
EPO Examination Matters ’23
The EPO hosts a great hybrid format conference Examination Matters 2023. The event is very interactive and provides lively discussions on topics of practical relevance for patent practitioners (both substantive and procedural). Check out the conference materials once they become available.