Schlich Ltd +44(0) 1903 717001 info@schlich.co.uk
  • EN
  • 中文
  • 한국어
  • 日本語
  • 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
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...
Can a Decision on Re-establishment be Challenged during Opposition?

Can a Decision on Re-establishment be Challenged during Opposition?

by Juliette Boynton | Sep 19, 2023 | EPO

Background The patent relates to an apparatus and method for filling a plurality of inflatable containers with a liquid, e.g. to fill a large number of water balloons simultaneously.  While the exact details of the need to request re-establishment are not critical to...
The UPC have been Quick to Issue their First Preliminary Injunction

The UPC have been Quick to Issue their First Preliminary Injunction

by Chloe Sullivan | Sep 14, 2023 | UPC

The application for the issue of an injunction resulted from a dispute between myStromer AG, the proprietor of European Patent No. 2546134, and RevoltZycling AG, the alleged infringer of the European patent in question. The Judge’s reasoning for issuing the...
EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal set to consider in G 1/23 the degree to which enablement impacts the status of a commercially available product as state of the art

EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal set to consider in G 1/23 the degree to which enablement impacts the status of a commercially available product as state of the art

by Carolyn Haywood | Aug 11, 2023 | EPO

Background to the referral The referral comes from Board 3.3.03 in the consideration of T 0438/19, an appeal against the decision of the opposition division to reject an opposition against European patent no. 2626911 directed to a material for encapsulating a solar...
Applying G 2/21 – Referring Board Suggests the Route Forward is Unclear

Applying G 2/21 – Referring Board Suggests the Route Forward is Unclear

by Sean Hutchinson | Jul 7, 2023 | EPO

Background In the opposition proceedings giving rise to EPO appeal no. T 116/18, the proprietor of European patent no. 2484209 filed experimental data dated after the filing date of the patent allegedly showing that two insecticide compounds had a synergistic effect...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Search

Recent Posts

  • Squeezed Out! AstraZeneca overturns Wyeth’s $107.5M Infringement Award
  • UPC Court of Appeal Confirms Lock-in Danger
  • 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

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.