Schlich Ltd +44(0) 1903 717001 info@schlich.co.uk
Human stem cell inventions

Human stem cell inventions

by | Jan 1, 2013 | EPO

The European “WARF” Decision – G02/06 – changed examination practice at the European Patent Office in relation to inventions involving human ES cells. Rule 28 EPC 2000 provides that European patents shall not be granted in respect of...
Omnipharm Limited v Merial [2011] EWHC 3393 (Pat)

Omnipharm Limited v Merial [2011] EWHC 3393 (Pat)

by | Jan 1, 2013 | UK

To be patentable a claim must be new and comprise an inventive step. Novelty is a question of fact: are all of the features of the claim present in a relevant single disclosure dating prior to the priority date of the patent application? However, the assessment of...
The CJEU decision in Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V. (C-34/10)

The CJEU decision in Brüstle v Greenpeace e.V. (C-34/10)

by | Jan 1, 2013 | EPO

Brüstle v. Greenpeace e.V. (C-34/10) concerns a patent held by Professor Oliver Brüstle, who is the director of the Institute of Reconstructive Neurobiology at the University of Bonn. His research includes treating neurological disease by transplanting neural stem...
US goes “first to file”, and more!

US goes “first to file”, and more!

by | Jan 1, 2013 | US & International

Prioritised Examination As long as the patent claims are not too complex, and for a fee, the process of examination (and potentially grant) of a US patent can be accelerated. Virtual Marking Products should still be marked ‘patent’ or ‘pat.’...