I am very grateful for all the positive feedback that I receive for this Blog. But it goes without saying that sometimes a party or a representative is just not happy to see details about her/his case on the internet.
Apparently, the FPC had (or, maybe, still has) to deal with a blockchain patent infringement case. From the hot off the press IAM Patent 1000 guide that I have received earlier today (not yet available online) and this source,
Case No. 4A_420/2019 (Supreme Court) | Decision of 13 May 2020 on appeal against O2016_001 | Decision of 27 June 2019
We had reported about the decision of the FPC on this Blog here.
Case No. O2017_014 | Decision of 10 March 2020 | ‘Fulvestrant use’
When you have read the report about the main hearing of 20 January 2020 on this Blog here, you probably won’t be overly surprised by the outcome: AZ’s complaint has been dismissed.
Case No. O2019_008 | Decision of 17 December 2019, on remittal of 4A_70/2019 | Decision of 6 August 2019 | ‘Flow sensor II’
The flow sensor litigation between Hamilton Medical and imtmedical is popping up once in a while.
I guess most of us have implemented certain changes to business procedures, due to the Covid-19 crisis. There is certainly some truth in the following ‘multiple choice questionnaire’ which I have recently seen first on Twitter (@MBA_ish):
Challenging times demand for creative solutions.
Case No. O2017_015 | Decision of 7 November 2019 | ‘Rame ferroviaire modulaire’
The patent at stake in this infringement case is Alstom‘s EP 1 024 070 B1; see EPO Register and Swissreg for further bibliographic information.
The official Annual Report 2019 of the FPC has been published yesterday. It comes along with an Executive Summary as follows:
The number of incoming cases fell compared to the previous year to 21 (29 in the previous year).
Case No. O2018_017 | Decision of 31 January 2020
F.J. Aschwanden on the one hand, and acG Holding (Anita and Clément Gutzwiller) and Andreas (André) Robert on the other hand are litigating over validity of EP 2 475 827 in Switzerland.
The Guidelines for Examination in the EPO («EPC Guidelines») and the Guidelines for Search and Examination at the EPO as PCT Authority («PCT-EPO Guidelines») give instructions on the practice and procedure to be followed in the various aspects of proceedings at the EPO.
Case No. O2017_002 | Hearing of 5 February 2020
On 5 February 2020 the main hearing in this matter took place at the FPC.
Case No. 4A_274/2019 (Supreme Court) | Decision of 26 November 2019, on appeal against O2017_023 (FPC) | Decision of 3 May 2019 | ‘SPC, salt form’
Readers of this Blog will recall the infringement case of Gilead’s SPC C00915894; the basic patent is (see EPO Register and Swissreg).
Don’t miss VESPA‘s annual evening seminar about recent case law of the FPC on Thursday, March 12 in Zurich; see the program below.