My last blog, published on 14 November 2013, mentioned that on the closing date (15 November 2013) set to send expressions of interest for persons wishing to be considered candidate Judges at the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”), only Austrian nationals would fulfil the conditions set by the Preparatory Committee, for only Austria had ratified the Agreement on a UPC. This statement was based on the fact that one of the prerequisites was to be a national of a “Contracting Member State.” Dear Austrian readers, I am so sorry to have raised unfounded expectations, for this statement was wrong. After having carefully reviewed the Agreement on a UPC, it turns out that not even Austrian nationals [...]
Tomorrow is the deadline for persons with the qualifications required for appointment to judicial office in a state which is a contracting party to the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) to express their interest in becoming a candidate judge on the stillborn UPC. According to paragraph 6 of the “Call for expression of interest of candidate judges of the future UPC”, prospective applicants must fulfil the following requirements:
- They must be nationals of a Contracting Member State,
- They must have a good command of at least one official language of the European Patent Office (DE/EN/FR),
- They must be able to ensure the highest standards of competence and have proven experience [...]
As he recounted in Groucho and me (1959), Groucho Marx once sent a telegram to the Friar’s Club of Beverly Hills with the following text: “Please accept my resignation. I don’t want to belong to any club that will accept people like me as a member.” One may wonder whether he would have had the same reaction if he had been told that he would have to pay a fee for not becoming a member of a club of which he did not wish to be a member in the first place. Probably, he would have thought that a club with such an extravagant idea could not even exist. Yet one does exist (and I swear it is not one of Groucho Marx’s very funny jokes). The club does exist and it is called the “Unified Pate [...]
As the readers may know, what is referred to as a “protective writ” is an anticipatory defensive mechanism that a person that fears to be sued for patent infringement may use in countries such as Germany, the Netherlands or Belgium to put Courts on notice of the non-infringement arguments relied on by the hypothetical future defendant. Their purpose is to make it more difficult for the patentee to obtain an “ex parte” preliminary injunction.
A Decision of 18 January 2013 handed down by Commercial Court number 4 of Barcelona, upheld by a Decision of 8 February 2013 from the same Court, has sparked the debate as to whether “protective writs” are now available also in Spain. For the reasons set [...]
Spanish Courts have recently decided two interesting cases that show that patent litigation is not the exclusive realm of big pharma or high tech. Patent litigation extends its tentacles to quotidian cooking tools that we and / or our most significant others use day after day in the kitchen.
The first judgment, handed down by the Supreme Court on 6 June 2013, put to an end the long-standing judicial battle between the manufacturer of the famous “Thermomix®” automatic cooking machine and a Spanish company that manufactures another automatic cooking machine under the trademark “MyCook®”.
The proceedings began in 2007, when the claimant filed a patent infringement action against the defendant [...]
A long time has already passed since 23 October 2001, when Judge Jacob ordered a preliminary injunction preventing the launch of the first paroxetine generics in England. To cut a long story short, the rationale was that, if there is an obstacle blocking your way into the “garden”, you have to clear the way before entering the “garden”. Otherwise, you may be injuncted. This rationale has since then been followed by Judges in England, but also in other jurisdictions such as Germany.
On 22 July 2013, Commercial Court number 4 of Barcelona handed down an interesting decision wherein the same logic transpires. The patent owner had sent a warning letter to a third party who had obtained [...]