FREE patent PDF download of US, European and PCT patent applications. NO pre-registration or logos inserted in the PDF file. European Patent Offices seat in Munich and discussed the state of play of . /0/ 00E0CD7FDC0D5CCC/$File/EPC_15th_edition_pdf. The European patent framework, in particular, is rather complex, since national .. 13 ronaldweinland.info
|Language:||English, Spanish, Dutch|
|Genre:||Business & Career|
|ePub File Size:||19.70 MB|
|PDF File Size:||12.45 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
EP full-text search enables you to search European patent search criteria; access the original document in PDF; machine-translate the titles. Convention on the Grant of European Patents. (European Patent Convention) of 5 October as revised by the Act revising Article 63 EPC of. European Patent Convention, 16th edition, (PDF, MB) The 16th edition of the European Patent Convention (published June ).
The first European patents with unitary effect can be applied for from this date onwards. But after it is granted, patentees can request unitary effect for the territory of the participating EU states. This means, for example, that the individual patents may only be limited or revoked for all these countries simultaneously. The EPO will be responsible for administering the unitary patent. The unitary patent is optional and provides another option for users besides the national patents and EP. The Unified Patent Court will have sole jurisdiction for any disputes arising in relation to EP and unitary patents in the 25 participating EU states with the exception of Spain, Croatia and Poland. The Court of First Instance will be composed of a central division and several local and regional divisions in the contracting member states.
Such unitary protection was effected both for "national" and European patents by Switzerland and Liechtenstein in with the Treaty between the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on Patent Protection of In some European countries, national patents are substantively examined, while in other countries there is no provision for such examination and patents are thus granted only if formal requirements are met, while novelty and inventive step is not evaluated.
It can be cheaper and tactically advantageous to apply for a few national patents rather than for a European patent at the European Patent Office. National patents may be the only available patents in European states that are neither party to the European Patent Convention nor the Eurasian Patent Convention.
This is the case for Andorra and Ukraine. Moldova, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina are extension states to the European Patent Convention, which means that European patents granted are deemed to take effect also in these states, if extension is correctly requested; and provided certain translation and publication requirements are met.
The term of a utility model is usually shorter than the term of a patent and has less stringent patentability requirements.
Differences and similarities between national laws[ edit ] Substantive patent law has been harmonized to a certain extent across national laws in Europe, notably upon signature of the Strasbourg Convention of and the European Patent Convention EPC of , and upon entry into force of the TRIPs Agreement.
In practice however, the interpretation of common substantive provisions have led to different interpretations in different European countries. Regarding procedural law, and especially regarding the procedures to examine infringement and validity of patents before national courts, significant differences exist across national laws. For instance, while in Germany validity and infringement of patents are examined by different courts in different procedures in a so-called "bifurcation system" , in the United Kingdom the same court is in charge of examining validity and infringement actions.
According to Mr Justice Kitchin , a British judge, " If they are tried separately it is all too easy for the patentee to argue for a narrow interpretation of his claim when defending it but an expansive interpretation when asserting infringement. But when the patentee goes on the attack, the fur bristles, the cat is twice the size with teeth bared and eyes ablaze. The bifurcation character of the Germany system "is considered as both a shortcoming in some respects, and as an advantage in others.
In agreement was reached between all European Union Member States except Italy and Spain on a European patent with unitary effect, more commonly known as the unitary patent, a proposed new type of patent that would be valid in participating member states of the European Union.
However, a number of contracting states have stipulated that a patent on the basis of a PCT-application can only be obtained by a European patent application closing of the national route. The European patent application can be a first application or claim the right of priority of an earlier application.
National applications in parties of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property or in a member state of the World Trade Organization as well as earlier international PCT or European applications can be considered as earlier applications.
An invention is considered to be new if it does not form part of the state of the art. For the assessment of novelty, older European applications that are not previously published, but have a filing or priority date that is before the filing or priority date of the application to be examined, are also relevant. Older European applications that are not previously published, are not taken into consideration as prior art during the assessment of an inventive step. Filing a European Patent Application 3.
Who can file? An application may be filed by the inventor or his successor in title, e. The inventor is to be designated and if the application is filed by a successor in title, such as the employer of the inventor, he has to indicate how he has obtained the right to the patent.
The correctness of these indications is not examined by the EPO. The applicant may be a natural or a legal person or any body equivalent to a legal person under its national law, irrespective of its nationality or residence. This means in practice that any body which is entitled to file an application in its country of residence can also file a European patent application.
An application may be filed by a plurality of applicants.
There may be different applicants for different contracting states. For example, it may be requested that the patent is granted to applicant A for state X, to applicant B for state Y and to applicants A and B in common for the other designated states. The application may also be filed at the patent office of a contracting state, if the law of that state so permits or prescribes. For reasons of national security, many contracting states prescribe that European patent applications from their territory have to be filed at the national office or make direct filing with the EPO subject to prior national authorisation.
However, divisional applications have to be directly filed with the EPO. English, French or German. The application may also be filed in any other language. In that case a translation in English, French or German has to be filed within two months. At any time during the proceedings before the EPO, the translation may be brought into conformity with the text of the application as filed.
The language in which the application is filed or translated is the language of the proceedings before the EPO.
It may be filed by post, by fax, online using prescribed software, or in person. Using other forms of telecommunication is not allowed; in particular e-mail cannot be used. The EPO also provides a reduced filing fee for this. Paper documents have to be filed in one copy which is scanned by the EPO. When the application is filed online or by fax, the filing of a confirmation copy is not necessary unless required by the EPO.
As a rule, such an invitation is only issued if the original copy is of inferior quality. Instead of filing application documents, the applicant can file a reference to a previously filed application. In that case, for obtaining a date of filing, the applicant must indicate the following details on the filing date: the filing date of the previous application, its file number, the office where it was filed, an indication that this reference replaces the description and any drawings.
The applicant can also refer to the claims of the previous application and it is strongly advised to make use of this possibility. In case of the reference to a previously filed application, the applicant must supply a certified copy of the previously filed application as well as a translation into one of the official languages of the EPO within two months of the filing date.
Previous time limits for filing a divisional application do not apply anymore. According to the EPC, a parent application is considered as pending until: the day before the mention of grant of a European patent in the European Patent Gazette, or in case of a rejection: until the expiry of the time limit for filing an appeal, if no appeal is filed, and until the final termination of the appeal proceedings, if an appeal is filed.
Thus, publications or acts of use which have taken place since this date do not constitute prior art. However, consequently, the renewal fees are also to be paid with a retroactive effect from the application date of the parent application.
In accordance with the provisions of the Patent Law Treaty, among these documents only the description is necessary for obtaining a filing date. The formal requirements for drafting the application documents are in line with the provisions of the PCT. Paper documents must be on strong, pliable, white A4 paper portrait format. Representation Applicants having their residence or principal place of business in a contracting state may act on their own behalf in proceedings before the EPO.
Applicants from other states have to appoint a representative having his place of business or employment within the contracting states and act through him in such proceedings. The representative has to be a European patent attorney who is on a list maintained by the EPO, or a legal practitioner entitled to act before the EPO.
If a representative is appointed all notifications sent by the EPO are sent to him. Examination of the application Procedures before the EPO are conducted in the language of the proceedings see 3.
However, in written proceedings parties may use any official language of the EPO. In addition, parties from a contracting state having a language other than English, French or German as an official language may file documents in such other language, provided a translation is filed within one month. In oral proceedings, any party may use an official language of the EPO different from the language of proceedings, provided it gives notice to the EPO one month before.
In that case, the EPO provides at its own expense interpretation into the language of the proceedings, if necessary. In accordance with the Patent Law Treaty, a filing date requires: an indication that a European patent is sought, information identifying the applicant, a description or a reference to a previously filed application see 3.
The search report is drawn up on the basis of the claims, with due regard to the description and any drawings. It mentions the documents retrieved by the search examiner which may be taken into consideration in assessing the requirements of novelty and inventive step.
In fields of technology where the products have short life cycles, as for example video games, internet disclosures also play an important role.
As a rule, the search opinion should cover all objections to the application, thereby indicating the deficient part of the application, the requirement which is not met and the reason for the objection where this is not immediately apparent.
No search is conducted for a claim which is deemed to be abandoned for non-payment of any claims fees which had become due. If the search division considers that the application does not meet the requirements of unity of invention, it draws up a partial search report for the unitary invention first mentioned in the claims.
With the transmittal of the partial search report, it informs the applicant accordingly and invites him to pay further search fees for each invention other than the one first mentioned in the claims, if the search is to cover these inventions as well. If the application contains more than one independent claim in the same category, the applicant is invited to indicate an independent claim per category on the basis of which he wishes the search to be carried out.
If the applicant fails to provide such an indication, the search is carried out on the first claim in each category, unless the applicant can convince the examiner, that a plurality of independent claims is appropriate under the circumstances. If the search division considers that the applica- tion does not comply with the requirements to such an extent that it is impossible to carry out a meaningful search, it issues a reasoned dec- laration to this effect which replaces the search report declaration of no search.