Lionel Martin

AD Article

UPC – The interpretation of patent claims by the UPC

Claim interpretation is central in patent infringement and revocation litigation. After a year and a half of activity, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has published several decisions clarifying its method of interpreting patent claims.

AD Article

1st decisions on the merits issued by the UPC Central Division (2/2): key findings from the CD Paris decisions of 19 and 29 July

On 19 July, we published the first part of our study on the assessment of inventive step by the UPC Central Division. On the same day, the Central Division

AD Article

1st decisions on the merits issued by the UPC Central Division (1/2): what does the UPC say about the assessment of inventive step compared to the EPO?

Since the entry into force of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), one of the burning questions that practitioners have in mind is whether the UPC will apply the problem-solution approach of the European Patent Office (EPO) in its assessment of the inventive step. While it is still too early to draw any conclusions, it would appear from the decisions we have studied that the UPC applies its own standards, drawing inspiration from the EPO's problem-solution approach without duplicating it. We offer here a first analysis of how UPC assessed inventive step up to the recent decisions of the Central Division issued on 16 July (Sanofi v. Amgen and Regeneron v. Amgen ). A second publication will focus on the Central Division's decisions of July 19 (Meril v. Edwards Lifesciences ).

AD Article

UPC already in infringement of article 6 ECHR ?

Is the UPC appeal court so in its youth that it has not yet learned to count up to 5 (at least without the help of its technically qualified judges) ?

AD Article

EPO anticipates unitary patent with start of transitional measures

The European Patent Office ("EPO") has activated these two measures opening up the use of the unitary patent for patent applications ready to be granted, i

AD Article

E-filing of French patent applications: French PTO (INPI) shuffle its feet after messing with PLT

August & Debouzy wins its proceedings for exceeding its power (ultra vires) before the Conseil d'Etat against the decision of the Director of the

AD Article

19th version of the UPC Rules of Procedure: the opt-out becomes more complex with the possibility of its removal

After the opt-out and the correction of the opt-out, there is now the addition of... the removal of the opt-out. Abstract: The 19th version of the Rules

AD Article

Opposition before the INPI: publication of the first opposition decision

In our article of 2 March 2022, we reported our impressions on the firsts oral proceedings before the INPI[1] and pointed out that they are very similar to

AD Article

San-Ei v. Nexira on the abuse of the right to sue for infringement: an isolated case or the beginning of a disturbing case law for right holders?

the abuse of the right to sue for infringement : When it comes to infringement proceedings, it is common for the defendant to counterclaim for abuse of process, and equally common for the defendant to be dismissed. The dismissal of such claims is usually based on the grounds that the plaintiff may be mistaken about the scope of his rights and that the mere bringing of such action is not abusive per se.

AD Article

Patent opposition before the INPI: veni, vidi, now being able to tell how it could be

The opposition proceedings before the INPI came into force on 1st April 2020 and is off to a good start, with around twenty oppositions having been filed, mainly by strawmen but also by foreign companies. The oral proceedings started on 25 January 2022, and we attended and participated in the first four. Here we share our first impressions before the oral proceedings resume in mid-March. On the whole, the course of oral proceedings before the INPI is very similar to that of the European Patent Office (EPO) with, nevertheless, a notable singularity: the INPI seems to be more welcoming of late submissions.