Reducing uncertainty in the patent application procedure – Insights from invalidating prior art in European patent applications

2009 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Sternitzke
Keyword(s):  
Patent Application ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Prior Art ◽  
Application Procedure ◽  
Patent Applications

scholarly journals Pharmaceutical Product Liability, Litigation Regimes and the Propensity to Patent: an Empirical Firm-level Investigation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitja Kovac ◽  
Salvini Datta ◽  
Rok Spruk
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
Product Liability ◽  
Pharmaceutical Product ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Second Category ◽  
The Empirical Analysis

<p>Our data on the legal status of patent applications is from European Patent Office's (EPO) PATSTAT database which contains bibliographic and legal status firm-level patent data from leading industrialized and developing countries for the period 1995-2015. Sixteen different forms of legal statues are broadly classified and systematized into four broad categories. The first category entails the patent applications sent to EPO. This category is used to code firm-level observations based on whether the patent application has been submitted to EPO. The second category comprises the pooled firm-level observations for which the patent application has been approved and official validated. This category comprises the firms for which a valid patent has been approved in a given year. The third category comprises the firms whose patent application has been rejected by EPO on various ground which exceed the scope of this paper. And fourth, the remaining forms of legal status were coded into miscellaneous category which amounts to a minor fraction of the whole set of applications and which are omitted from the empirical analysis.</p>

Filing a Patent Application

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip W. Grubb ◽  
Peter R. Thomsen ◽  
Tom Hoxie ◽  
Gordon Wright
Keyword(s):  
Home Country ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
General Rule ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Commercial Interest ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
Priority Date ◽  
A Priority ◽  
One Year ◽  
Paris Convention

This chapter first addresses questions such as whether a patent application should be filed at all, and if so, when and where to file. As a general rule, if an invention appears patentable and may be of some commercial interest, a priority application should be filed. The applicant then has one year under the Paris Convention before significant amounts of time and money must be invested in filing in other countries. If the decision is made to file in other countries, or even to proceed to obtain a patent in the home country, the first filing gives a priority date that can be relied upon later. In other words, when in doubt, file an application. The remainder of the chapter discusses non-convention filings, European patent applications, international applications, registrations and patents of importation, and petty patents.

scholarly journals Pharmaceutical Product Liability, Litigation Regimes and the Propensity to Patent: an Empirical Firm-level Investigation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitja Kovac ◽  
Salvini Datta ◽  
Rok Spruk
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
Product Liability ◽  
Pharmaceutical Product ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Second Category ◽  
The Empirical Analysis

<p>Our data on the legal status of patent applications is from European Patent Office's (EPO) PATSTAT database which contains bibliographic and legal status firm-level patent data from leading industrialized and developing countries for the period 1995-2015. Sixteen different forms of legal statues are broadly classified and systematized into four broad categories. The first category entails the patent applications sent to EPO. This category is used to code firm-level observations based on whether the patent application has been submitted to EPO. The second category comprises the pooled firm-level observations for which the patent application has been approved and official validated. This category comprises the firms for which a valid patent has been approved in a given year. The third category comprises the firms whose patent application has been rejected by EPO on various ground which exceed the scope of this paper. And fourth, the remaining forms of legal status were coded into miscellaneous category which amounts to a minor fraction of the whole set of applications and which are omitted from the empirical analysis.</p>

Disclaimers in European Patent Applications

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (12) ◽  
pp. 1204-1216
Author(s):  
Michał Barycki
Keyword(s):  
Patent Application ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
European Patent ◽  
General Notion ◽  
Patent Office ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
The Eu

Abstract A European patent application may be amended by, among others, deleting a part of the claimed subject matter under established conditions or by the incorporation of an undisclosed or disclosed disclaimer. Disclaimers are a useful tool in order to maintain the balance between the practical needs of applicants and the interests of third parties in legal clarity and completeness. The incorporation of disclaimers may not extend beyond the content of the European patent application as filed and the protection it confers. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how an applicant can introduce a negative technical feature into the patent application in the light of the extensive judicial practice of the Technical and Enlarged Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office. The author has analysed the criteria for disclaimers set out in decisions G 1/03, G 2/10 and G 1/16 in accordance with the general notion of patent law and requirements of patentability. Additionally, this problem was also characterized in the light of the judicial practice of national courts and legislations of the EU Member States.

scholarly journals Indian medical device sector: insights from patent filing trends

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suchita Markan ◽  
Yogmaya Verma
Keyword(s):  
Medical Device ◽  
Emerging Market ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
Market Potential ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Indian Medical ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
The Government ◽  
Patent Filing

In this study, patent application filing trends in India for the last decade (2005–2014) were analysed to understand the medical device patent filing profile. As India is the key emerging market with huge market potential, this study was also undertaken to identify the top medical device companies filing patents in India, the niche technology domains with maximum filings, key gaps in medical device innovation profile and scope for business opportunities. It was observed that patent application filings in the medical device sector during the last 5 years (2009–2013) contributed only to 2% of the total patent applications filed, which may be attributed to nascent medical device sector and lack of Intellectual Property (IP) awareness or funding support for IP filings. The analysis shows increasing trends in medical device patent applications in India, with major share of patent applications being filed from the USA. The Indian applications in this sector contributed only to 17% of the total patent application filings in the last decade. Although foreign players dominate the medical device sector, this study indicates that though at a small scale, Indian applicants are actively filing patents in all key domains of the medical device sector. With the enabling environment being provided by the Government of India with recent policy initiatives such as Startup India, Make in India, 100% Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)and so on and support to start-ups for IP filings, the Indian medical device industry is expected to witness aggressive IP filing and innovation trends and is poised to grow exponentially targeting US$50 billion industry by 2025.

16. Procedure for grant of a patent

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Patent Application ◽  
European Patent Office ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Patent Office ◽  
Patent Cooperation Treaty ◽  
Key Features ◽  
The Uk

This chapter explains the processes involved in granting patents as well as the factors that applicants must take into account when deciding whether to patent an invention in the UK. The role of patent agents and the choice of route to take to secure grant of the patent are considered. The chapter then documents the procedures in the application for a patent, paying particular attention to some of the key features of the UK and European Patent Office patent application processes together with the Patent Cooperation Treaty. It also describes situations in which applicants and patentees are able to amend their applications and the restrictions under which such amendments operate. Finally, it looks at a number of proposals to reform the patent procedure.

scholarly journals Early Disclosure of Invention and Reduced Duplication: An Empirical Test

2020 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 2677-2685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Lück ◽  
Benjamin Balsmeier ◽  
Florian Seliger ◽  
Lee Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Business Strategy ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Empirical Test ◽  
Firm Strategy ◽  
Innovation Strategy ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Negative Externalities ◽  
Technological Competition ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
The U.S

Much work on innovation strategy assumes or theorizes that competition in innovation elicits duplication of research and that disclosure decreases such duplication. We validate this empirically using the American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA), three complementary identification strategies, and a new measure of blocked future patent applications. We show that AIPA—intended to reduce duplication, through default disclosure of patent applications 18 months after filing—reduced duplication in the U.S. and European patent systems. The blocking measure provides a clear and micro measure of technological competition that can be aggregated to facilitate the empirical investigation of innovation, firm strategy, and the positive and negative externalities of patenting. This paper was accepted by Joshua Gans, business strategy.

scholarly journals The Business of DNA Nanotechnology: Commercialization of Origami and Other Technologies

Molecules ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine E. Dunn
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
Dna Nanotechnology ◽  
Activity Analysis ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Nanoscale Structures ◽  
Patent Applications

It is often argued that DNA nanotechnology has a multitude of possible applications. However, despite great advances in the understanding of the fundamental principles of the field, to date, there has been comparatively little commercial activity. Analysis of patent applications and company case studies suggests that this is now starting to change. The number of patent application filings is increasing, and new companies are being formed to exploit technologies based on nanoscale structures and devices made from DNA. There are parallels between the commercial developments in this field and those observed in other areas of innovation. Further commercialization is expected and new players will emerge.

scholarly journals Is Poland an Innovative Country?

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorota Chybowska ◽  
Leszek Chybowski ◽  
Valeri Souchkov
Keyword(s):  
Developed Countries ◽  
European Patent ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current Position ◽  
Technology And Innovation ◽  
Innovation Potential ◽  
Patent Statistics ◽  
Patent Applications ◽  
Do So ◽  
Developing And Developed Countries

Abstract The potential for innovativeness is difficult to measure, though many have attempted to do so. In order to look at Poland’s innovation potential, its current position and its opportunity to grow, compared with developing and developed countries, this study analysed the patent statistics of the Polish and European Patent Offices. Poland has been a member of the European Union for over a decade now. Therefore, we took into consideration the statistics for patent applications and grants for the last decade, up to the first quarter of 2016. The questions we wanted to answer concerned not only the technology fields that Poland patented its inventions in, but also the types of patent grantees and applicants. In order to determine why Poland is still considered to be only a moderate innovator by the Innovation Union Scoreboard, we also gathered information on Polish inventors abroad in 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, to see their number, technology fields, and types of patent grantees. Finally, we attempted to identify the main barriers that seem to inhibit Polish technology and innovation growth, despite significantly growing R&D intensities (up from 0.56 GDP and EUR 1,139 M in 2004 to 0.94 GDP and EUR 3,864 M in 2014).

Patents for plants and genes under the European Patent Convention

1992 ◽  
Vol 99 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Noel Byrne
Keyword(s):  
Western Europe ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
Plant Biotechnology ◽  
European Patent ◽  
European Patent Convention ◽  
National Patent ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Biotechnological Invention ◽  
Written Description ◽  
Skilled Person

SynopsisThe cost of patenting an invention should be incurred only where the patent is likely to give the inventor an economic or a tactical advantage. Where it is practicable, secrecy may be preferable to patenting. If an advantage from patenting can be envisaged, then in Western Europe the inventor can apply either for a European patent under the European Patent Convention or for a national patent. The inventor in plant biotechnology faces a ban on patenting certain inventions, including plant varieties and essentially biological processes for the production of plants. But since this ban is interpreted strictly, there are opportunities for patenting what at first glance might seem not patentable. A patent application must give a written description of the invention that is complete enough for a skilled person to reproduce it. The inventor may be required to supplement the description in a patent specification for a biotechnological invention, by depositing a sample of relevant biological materials. A European patent is treated as a national patent in the country for which it was granted. Since a patent may be invalidated in enforcement proceedings, patenting may turn out to have been a costly mistake.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document