Search for: "Laurent Teyssèdre"
Results 21 - 35
of 35
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2023, 6:29 am
Thanks to Laurent Teyssèdre for first bringing this Kat's attention to the case on his blog. [read post]
11 Mar 2021, 2:41 am
List of signatories Jean-Michel Bruguière, Professor at the University of Grenoble-Alpes, Anne-Catherine Chiariny, Associate Professor at the University of Montpellier, Jean-Pierre Clavier, Professor of private law at the University of Nantes, Director of the Master in Intellectual Property Law, Matthieu Dhenne, Attorney-at-Law at the Paris Bar, President of de Boufflers Institute, Charles de Haas, Attorney-at-Law at the Paris Bar, Jean-Christophe Galloux, Professor at the… [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 5:01 pm
Should you wish to download the whole decision, just click here.The file wrapper can be found here.Great minds think alike; Laurent Teyssèdre has commented this decision on the very same day (here). [read post]
20 Feb 2010, 11:01 am
As far as I can see, the race was won by Laurent Teyssèdre (here), followed by IPKat David Pearce (here). [read post]
16 Aug 2011, 3:01 pm
The appeal fee is to be reimbursed.Should you wish to download the whole decision, click here.The file wrapper can be found here.NB: There is a post on this decision on Laurent Teyssèdre’s blog. [read post]
30 Aug 2010, 3:01 pm
The present decision is in no way spectacular but it presents in a very pedagogical manner how inventive step is nowadays assessed by the Boards in the chemical realm:Novelty of the subject-matter having been acknowledged, the assessment of inventive step begins with the search for the closest prior art.The closest prior art[4.1] The closest state of the art is normally a prior art document disclosing subject-matter with the same objectives as the claimed invention and having the most relevant… [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 4:03 pm
The present decision is a sad example of how a notice of appeal should not be written. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 3:01 pm
This decision deals with the patentability of meta-methods used for software creation.** Translation from the German **[2] The lack of inventive step already results from actual claim 1, which concerns a method for creating software programs by means of an electronic data processing system. [read post]
12 Jun 2011, 3:01 pm
Not long ago, I have reported two cases (here and here) where the Board found auxiliary requests inadmissible because they could have been filed or were withdrawn after having been filed before the Opposition Division (OD). [read post]
13 Nov 2010, 11:00 am
The present decision deals with an appeal against the decision of the opposition division (OD) to revoke a European patent owned by a Spanish company. [read post]
20 Oct 2010, 3:01 pm
Claim 1 as granted read:Use of organic fibres having a melting point smaller than 300°C, an average length 1 greater than 1 mm and a diameter Ø not exceeding 200 ? [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 3:02 pm
Most readers of this blog are certainly aware of the fact that petitions for review hardly ever succeed. [read post]
29 Sep 2010, 3:01 pm
The Enlarged Board of appeal (EBA) has spoken again! [read post]
12 May 2010, 3:01 pm
There are farewell gifts you’d rather not receive. [read post]
22 May 2010, 11:00 am
Does the change of wording between R 64 EPC 1973 and R 99 EPC 2000 have an impact on how a notice of appeal and/or a statement of grounds of appeal has to be drafted? [read post]
