Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 SEPTEMBER 2018

Playing Fairly In Appeals

Marks & Clerk
Marks & Clerk
Contributor
Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk LLP was founded in 1887 by George Croydon Marks, who was joined in partnership by...

View firm profile
Explore more from Marks & Clerk

The patentee argued that this evidence was filed in response to the Board's preliminary opinion which was not in the patentee's favour.

United KingdomIntellectual Property

Following an appeal by both the patentee (Eli Lilly) and the opponent (Dr Armin K. Bohman), the Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office has, in T0156/15, raised important points regarding the completeness of a party's case and the requirement for fairness to both parties in the proceedings, as well as the nature of admissible expert evidence.

Late-filed submissions

The patentee filed expert evidence less than two weeks before oral proceedings before the Board, in response to a preliminary opinion of the Board. One (D42) was a technical declaration, while the other (D43) was an opinion of a former member of both the Technical Board of Appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal. In particular, the opinion D43 centred on whether the claims of the patent under appeal recited subject matter which extended beyond the content of the parent application as filed.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from