PATENTS, TRADE MARKS AND DESIGNS
WE HELP INDIVIDUALS AND BUSINESSES OF ALL shapes and SIZES
Schlich is a unique team of European Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys based in the South of England. Since 2004, we’ve helped our clients acquire, and defend, their IP assets, helping them to build and grow successful businesses based on their IP assets.
We draft and file patent applications, get them granted and enforce them. We also prepare and file trade mark applications and prosecute them to registration.
To enforce our clients’ rights, we also represent them in court and other inter partes proceedings (and, where necessary, attack and remove competitors’ rights).
Recent Insights
Read the latest news and briefings from the team at Schlich about real cases involving patents, trade marks and designs.
Aldi Strikes Again
Aldi’s product designers and trade mark attorneys continue to be successful in finding the right balance between gaining inspiration from branded products and copying said branded products in an effort to gain more sales based on the brand’s reputation in the market.
Up, down, discounted? EPO fees are changing
The EPO has recently announced a revised fee structure for the next two years, including new fee reductions for micro-enterprises and the reduction of some fees, as well as some increases elsewhere. At Schlich we are ready to guide you through these changes and advise whether you may benefit from paying upcoming fees before/after implementation of the new fee structure.
UK Supreme Court confirms that AI cannot be named as an inventor on UK patent applications
As part of a long, ongoing legal battle across the globe, a further blow has been delivered by the UK Supreme Court to those who believe in the correctness of naming AI systems as inventors on patent applications for AI-devised inventors. The Supreme Court has upheld the earlier decisions of the UKIPO, High Court and Court of Appeal to refuse patent applications made by Dr Thaler for inventions claimed to have been devised by the AI system, DABUS
Back in the Maze: Is the Decision of the Referring Board in G 2/21 About to be Overturned?
When the referring board’s written decision was issued in the case underpinning the “plausibility” referral (G 2/21) late last year, it provided much-needed certainty about how the EPO would apply G 2/21 in the future. However, that certainty has been short-lived because the opponent in that case has filed a petition for review of the decision by the Enlarged Board of Appeal.
Generic Drug Manufacturers Protected by the “Skinny Label” provisions of the Hatch–Waxman Act
The US Federal Circuit has given a decision that blocks a potential form of “evergreening” that pharmaceutical companies might have used to prevent launch of generic versions of their drugs through asserting later-filed method-of-use patents for the drug.
Are faces distinctive? EUIPO says maybe, but not as much as Donald Trump’s hair!
Logos, company or product names come to mind when it comes to the term “trade mark”. Unbeknownst to the general public, trade mark registrations can also be obtained to protect a shape or colour. In fact, some have even attempted to register a mark for smells, sounds or even, human faces. This begs the question, is it possible to trade mark a person’s face? A recent decision from the EUIPO Board of Appeal (BoA) sheds a glimmer of hope for those up for a challenge.
The Maze of Plausibility Case Law: The Referring Board in G 2/21 Suggests a Way Through
When the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal issued its decision in G 2/21 (the “plausibility” referral) earlier this year, many were left wondering what the requirements were for a patent applicant/proprietor to be able to rely on post-filed evidence in support of inventive step. The referring board in the case underpinning the referral (T 116/18) has recently issued a decision setting out its interpretation of G 2/21 in detail, offering new insight into how the EPO is likely to apply this important decision in the future.
The EPO Examining Division are Criticized by the Boards of Appeal for Breaking the Rules of Procedure
The Board have remitted this recently refused case to the Examining Division who have been criticized for committing several substantial procedural violations, including depriving an applicant of their all-important right to oral proceedings.
EXCELLENCE IN PATENT AND TRADE MARK LAW
The Schlich Team
Our clients expect and receive a responsive, friendly, high quality and great value service thanks to our experienced professionals. Our UK and European Patent Attorneys and Chartered Trade Mark Attorneys have a broad range of scientific and technical degrees and Ph.Ds from top UK Universities, and have decades of experience advising at cutting edge of legal and commercial issues and technologies.
We build on our deep experience of prosecution and inter partes proceedings to give the best strategic and practical advice, and to secure the best patent and trade mark protection for our clients’ innovations. Our team does this efficiently, and in a friendly and clear manner, supported by a wider team of highly skilled and experienced legal support staff.
Latest Firm News
Update: Schlich Walks to the EPO!
Working in kilometres (we are, after all, European Patent Attorneys), we have managed to walk approximately 530km and are officially more than halfway to Munich! If we were to physically walk to...
Schlich walks to the EPO!
After the New Year’s confetti has been swept away, the biscuit selection boxes are demolished and everyone has settled back into the nine to five, it’s likely that some of our New Years resolutions may have already taken a backseat.
Schlich Recommended in Juve 2024 Rankings
We are thrilled to announce that Schlich has again been recommended as a leading patent firm in the 2024 Juve rankings.