Your search for ‘Beck Greener’ returned 68 results

The EPO has paused all proceedings where the determination of whether an invention contains an inventive step is solely reliant on data that was not publicly available at the filing date...

Virgin had alleged that their European patent (UK) 1495908 was infringed by aircraft seats of Premium Aircraft. At first instance, the judge, Lewison J had held that Claim 1 was limited to seats having a "flip-over" construction in which self contained integers formed the bed.

In a recent case, the Court of Appeal has considered what constitutes contributory infringement. It has concluded that where the supplier knows that his product can, and probably will be modifed, to infringe, the supplier commits an offence.

In an extremely long decision ([2009] EWHC 1671 (Pat)), running to 356 paragraphs, and dated 10th July 2009, Kitchin J of the English Patents Court found European patent (UK) No. 0819258 of Novartis to be new, non-obvious and infringed by contact lenses called Acuvue Oasys sold by Johnson & Johnson.

The Court of Appeal has considered the obviousness of patents in two recent cases, and has underlined that there is no "obvious to try" test and in each case upheld the decision of the judge at first instance.

This decision tests the general principle of UK patent law that if an invention is ‘seen' before filing any patent application, it cannot be patented.

Dr Duncan Kelly has just been awarded £1 million in compensation in a landmark judgement from Mr Justice Floyd in the English high court.

Patents lie at the interface between technology and law. This article provides a critical review of four high profile cases from 2020 in which patents relating to pharmaceuticals were litigated in the UK Courts.

Two recent cases from the English courts provide timely reminders of the need for advisors not only to be competent, but also to have the relevant skills and expertise.

In a recent decision of the High Court, <em>Halliburton v Comptroller of Patents</em> ([2011] EWHC 2508), relating to the high-profile area of patent law (patentability of computer-implemented inventions), His Honour Judge Colin Birss has made some interesting and useful comments that can serve as a helpful guide to those seeking patent protection in this area.

Third parties can now submit observations as to the patentability of pending international (PCT) patent applications.

Confirming that the Court of Appeal had not found Daiichi’s medicine, Levofloxacin, to be obvious, Jacob LJ commented “I am not sorry to reach this conclusion.

It is an exciting time for technical innovations in the food industry, in the UK, Europe and globally.

The English Court of Appeal has suggested that the "Problem and Solution" (PSA) approach, much used by the EPO when considering obviousness, should be considered to be an "administrative tool" only which does not necessarily lead to the "correct" answer.

Further changes are occurring at the European Patent Office.

Following trial and judgement in patent infringement proceedings relating to aircraft seats, the matter came to a hearing as to costs and, in particular, as to whether there should be disclosure of a Part 36 offer.

An inventor may wish to obtain patent protection to protect his invention. In a global economy, protection in more than one country may be necessary.