The IPKat BLOG – Page 65

In: The IPKat BLOG

Adding matter by amending the description to exclude embodiments (Ensygnia v Shell [2023] EWHC 1495 (Pat))

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/adding-matter-by-amending-description.html The recent High Court decision in Ensygnia v Shell ([2023] EWHC 1495 (Pat)) is highly relevant to the ongoing controversy of claim interpretation and description amendments (IPKat). In Ensygnia v Shell, Miss Charlotte May KC (sitting as Deputy Judge in the High Court of England and Wales) considered how a post-grant amendment... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Heart bread roll not distinctive enough, says EUIPO Board of Appeal

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/heart-bread-roll-not-distinctive-enough.html With decision of 6 July 2023 (original German text and English machine translation) the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO (BoA) stated that a 3D trade mark described as a “heart-based bread roll” is devoid of the necessary minimum degree of distinctive character. Background A German company (applicant)... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

[Guest post] Book review: ‘Developments and Directions in Intellectual Property Law: 20 Years of the IPKat’

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/guest-post-book-review-developments-and.html As IPKat readers know, it was only a couple of months ago that The IPKat celebrated its first 20 years of activity. To mark this milestone, we organized an event in London in June 2023 [Katreports here, here, here and here] and Kats Hayleigh and Eleonora put together a collection... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

[Guest post] Court of appeal The Hague: free-riding not possible if reputed brand has suffered continuous decline

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/guest-post-court-of-appeal-hague-free.html The IPKat has received and is pleased to host the following contribution by former GuestKat Jan Jacobi (BarentsKrans) regarding a recent Dutch decision on free riding and declining reputation of a brand. Here’s what Jan writes: Court of appeal The Hague: free-riding not possible if reputed brand has suffered... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

The relevance of G 2/21 to machine learning inventions (T 2803/18)

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-relevance-of-g-221-to-machine.html The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) decision in G 2/21 related to the evidence requirement for a purported technical effect relied on for inventive step. G 2/21 arose from a case in the biotech field. The referring decision and much of the surrounding commentary to G 2/21 also focused on the terminology of plausibility, which is... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Thursday Thingies

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/thursday-thingies.html Too busy with your summer plans and suffering from the IP FOMO? Here are some summer news items to keep you in the loop. New GuestKat The IPKat is delighted to welcome Alessandro Cerri as a new GuestKat for the next six months. Alessandro works as in-house legal counsel in the... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Boards of Appeal confirm lack of legal basis for mandatory ViCo proceedings absent a state of general emergency (T 0149/21)

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/boards-of-appeal-confirm-lack-of-legal.html There is growing consensus from recent Boards of Appeal that G1/21 does not endorse the imposition of ViCo oral proceedings, absent a state of general emergency (T 1501/20). These most recent cases contradict the decisions of earlier Boards of Appeal that G1/21 could be ignored in view of improvements in ViCo technology. ViCo controversy... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Unpacking IDC v Lenovo (Part III): $0.175 per cellular unit

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/unpacking-idc-v-lenovo-part-iii-0175.html After explaining the general principles of FRAND the Judge in Interdigital v Lenovo FRAND judgment [2023] EWHC 539 (Pat) calculated what the FRAND rates should be for Lenovo. This is the third instalment of this Kat’s analysis. You can read Part I and Part II here and here. FRAND –... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Georgia jury says “no trade secrets” in Boeing wing-component dispute

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/georgia-jury-says-no-trade-secrets-in.html Earlier this year, the AmeriKat found herself in Atlanta, Georgia for a work meeting. Not yet faced with the sweetly sticky weather of the southern summers, she was instead greeted with cool breezes and bright blue skies from which she could spy the airplanes coming into land at Atlanta’s... Continue reading
In: The IPKat BLOG

Does the Paris Convention allow cross-IP priority claims?

http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2023/08/does-paris-convention-allow-cross-ip.html Priority claims for IP rights allow obtaining an earlier priority date for an IP application based on an earlier IP application in another country. For member states of the Paris Convention, Art. 4(1) Paris Convention provides this basic principle: Any person who has duly filed an application for a... Continue reading