Schlich Ltd +44(0) 1903 717001 info@schlich.co.uk
  • Schlich China
  • Client Portal
Schlich Ltd
  • Our Firm
  • IP Services
    • Patents
    • EPO Oppositions & Appeals
    • UKIPO Proceedings
    • UPC Proceedings
    • Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • IP Strategy
  • Patent Specialities
    • Life Sciences & Biotech
    • Chemical & Pharmaceutical
    • Mechanical, Engineering and Physics
    • Software, Electronics and Communications
  • Insights
  • Inventors’ Zone
  • Contact
Select Page
The Federal Circuit clarifies conflicts arising between Patent Term Adjustment and Obviousness-type Double Patenting

The Federal Circuit clarifies conflicts arising between Patent Term Adjustment and Obviousness-type Double Patenting

by David Eyre | Sep 16, 2024 | US & International

Background  For valuable inventions it is relatively typical for a US patent to be expanded into a family of patent rights. Naturally, the value of patents is further enhanced by extra patent term.  Patents with expiry dates beyond the normal 20 year period can be...
What is Obvious about a US Design Patent?

What is Obvious about a US Design Patent?

by David Eyre | Jun 26, 2024 | Designs & Copyright, US & International

Registered Design Rights be they UK Registered Design Rights, European Registered Design Rights, US Design Patents or Registered Design Rights granted in other jurisdictions are highly useful Intellectual Property Rights that have been increasing in commercial...
Clarity Once Again: The EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal Suggests the Current Test for Whether to Admit Post-Filed Evidence into Proceedings Should Stand

Clarity Once Again: The EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal Suggests the Current Test for Whether to Admit Post-Filed Evidence into Proceedings Should Stand

by Sean Hutchinson | Jun 12, 2024 | EPO

Background In our article of January 2024, we reported that the opponent in the case underpinning the “plausibility” referral (G 2/21) had filed a petition for review of the referring board’s decision (T 116/18) by the Enlarged Board of Appeal. That petition is...
The EPO Examining Division are Criticized by the Boards of Appeal for Breaking the Rules of Procedure

The EPO Examining Division are Criticized by the Boards of Appeal for Breaking the Rules of Procedure

by Chloe Sullivan | Dec 20, 2023 | EPO

The case has now been remitted to the ED after it was found by the Board that several substantial procedural violations were committed. Below is our timeline of the examination procedure and it is safe to say that, after considering the facts, we are siding with the...
Claim interpretation – how can “bigger” be the same as “not bigger?”

Claim interpretation – how can “bigger” be the same as “not bigger?”

by David Eyre | Sep 29, 2023 | UK

This case relates to methods for manufacturing a quartz glass lamp. In particular the invention relates to forming the seal between the metal electrode and the quartz glass tube during the course of manufacture.   Accordingly, the problem that this invention seeks to...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Recent Posts

  • When “Monotherapy” Means Monotherapy: A Cautionary Tale on Claim Interpretation and Added Matter at the EPO
  • Has the EPO TBA Demolished the Essentiality Test?
  • A Clear Way Forward for Description Amendments: Decision Issued in G 1/25
  • UPC Considers Intermediate Generalizations
  • Copyright Infringement in the Digital Age: Guidance from the CJEU on How to Find Your Way Through

Recent Comments

    CIPA
    IPReg
    CITMA
    • Instagram

    Services

    • Patents
    • EPO Oppositions & Appeals
    • UKIPO Proceedings
    • UPC Proceedings
    • Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • IP Strategy

    About

    • Our Firm
    • Careers
    • Our People
    • Policies

    Contact

    • Contact
    • Inventors Zone
    © 2026 Schlich, All rights reserved | Built by Molokini
    European Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. Schlich Ltd is a UK limited company, registration no. 05238489, address: 9 St Catherine's Road, Littlehampton, West Sussex, BN17 5HS.