tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post7386269360172095968..comments2024-03-29T10:54:23.099+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Wasting the time of the Enlarged Board of Appeal? G1/12Verónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-52777761943604764372013-03-19T11:34:21.786+00:002013-03-19T11:34:21.786+00:00Well - for me, with all due respect, this is a qui...Well - for me, with all due respect, this is a quite quite clear case: <br /><br />This alleged "error" could not have happened if there was not representative; the "old" patentee would not have had the idea to file an appeal with regard to the revocation of a patent it does not own any more, the new owner would not have filed in the other name. <br /><br />With a representative involved, it is not at all "obvious" that another entity was giving instructions to file an appeal. <br /><br />With the increased diligence required from professional representatives, the appeal is - unfortunately - gone, i.e. deemed not to be filed (party has got no right to appeal). <br /><br />I agree that I cannot understand that we need a board of appeal for this. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-23512711809727842712012-06-11T10:27:20.414+01:002012-06-11T10:27:20.414+01:00Since Doug Adams found 42 as the "Answer to t...Since Doug Adams found 42 as the "Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, The Universe, and Everything" there are no more worthwhile questions for the EBA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-9156650231669134352012-06-07T14:55:42.242+01:002012-06-07T14:55:42.242+01:00Re. "dull and procedural", I was once in...Re. "dull and procedural", I was once involved in a similar case in which appeal had been filed in the name of a by then no-longer-existent opponent, rather than its supposed successor in title, with the added zest that said succession involved a convoluted paper trail in which tax avoidance had clearly been the overriding concern. While indeed procedural, this case was far from dull. Indeed, it was probably the most entertaining case in my career so far, although probably not nearly as enjoyable for the hapless MegaCorp behind the appealant, or for the BigLaw firm which unsuccessfully tried to salvage the case for them...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-29439527949433782352012-06-07T13:43:43.008+01:002012-06-07T13:43:43.008+01:00Rather dull, rather boring, but rather important. ...Rather dull, rather boring, but rather important. <br /><br />Boring decisions can have big effects. <br /> <br />Take for example the question "whether a decision of grant can be corrected during opposition proceedings". <br /><br />Seems pretty boring eh? But let us suppose a case where the decision to grant erroneously names GB as a designated country despite this designation being specifically withdrawn at time of filing, and let us suppose that this GB designation is then the source of extended litigation in the UK courts? <br /><br />Would it not be nice for the defendant (and legal certainty) if the erroneous decision to grant could be corrected in opposition proceedings?<br /><br />To refuse correction during opposition of errors made during prosecution would place the EPO on a par with the laws of the Medes and Persians – an error made could never be corrected by those most adversely affected by the error.<br /><br />The EPO should reach a grown up decision – that when they screw up they should fix the screw-up, regardless of which "division" made the screw up and which "division" is dealing with the matter. <br /><br />See EP1495908 and subsequent litigation where the above circumstances apply.Meldrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09841440718012449720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75158222955516544182012-06-07T10:19:31.035+01:002012-06-07T10:19:31.035+01:00The Enlarged Board is there to decided on matters ...The Enlarged Board is there to decided on matters in certain specific situations and 'dull and procedural' stuff is what the EPO does a lot of the time. The more it is used the better. If it finds itself over-worked the EPO has the ability to provide more resources for it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com