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
Incorrect use of discretion by Opposition Division leads to remittal under the old RPBA

Incorrect use of discretion by Opposition Division leads to remittal under the old RPBA

by Carolyn Haywood | Jan 1, 2020 | Briefings, EPO

Division was held to be enough for remittal to be ordered. T 688/16 T 688/16 relates to an appeal of the Decision of an Opposition Division to revoke EP2053959, a patent related to a method for assessing and guaranteeing the thermal hygiene efficiency in a multi-tank...
Shanks v Unilever – What does Outstanding mean?

Shanks v Unilever – What does Outstanding mean?

by Juliette Boynton | Jan 1, 2020 | Briefings, UK

The Supreme Court issued its judgement recently in relation to the application for employee compensation by Professor Shanks considering use of the “outstanding benefit” test in relation to a large company. Prof Shanks was employed by CRL, a wholly owned...
Incorrect use of discretion by Opposition Division leads to remittal under the old RPBA

Incorrect use of discretion by Opposition Division leads to remittal under the old RPBA

by | Oct 1, 2019 | Briefings, EPO

Division was held to be enough for remittal to be ordered. T 688/16 T 688/16 relates to an appeal of the Decision of an Opposition Division to revoke EP2053959, a patent related to a method for assessing and guaranteeing the thermal hygiene efficiency in a multi-tank...
Clash at the High Court: Should I Stay or Should I Go

Clash at the High Court: Should I Stay or Should I Go

by Alex Bajjon | Aug 1, 2019 | Briefings, UK

Background The patent in question in this case was EP2854723 in the name of Coloplast A/S and related to ostomy bags. The European patent was opposed by Hollister Inc on 16 April 2018 on the ground that the claimed invention was not new and did not involve an...
Does the Gillette Defence Extend to Cases Determined under the Doctrine of Equivalents?

Does the Gillette Defence Extend to Cases Determined under the Doctrine of Equivalents?

by Juliette Boynton | Mar 1, 2019 | Briefings, UK

Technetix was the proprietor of a patent for a cable tap, namely a unit which subdivides a cable TV signal arriving at a street cabinet to individual feeds for individual houses. Cable taps incorporate directional coupler units which reduce the strength of the cable...
« 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.