Paris Court of Appeal of 19 March 2014 (10/21042) – Artygraphie v Cartel
Source: EPO OJ 2015 SE2
EPO Summary of the case
Keyword: patentable invention – technical character
The defendant was the proprietor of European patent 1 336 948 for a "public display interactive terminal". A subsequent request for limitation of the French part of the patent was granted by INPI.
The appellant sought the French part's revocation in its entirety for lack of technical character, novelty and inventive step.
The appellant wanted all claims revoked, even though the defendant was only suing it for infringing claims 1 to 5, 7 and 9. Its request in respect of dependent claims 6, 8 and 10 was therefore inadmissible for lack of legal interest.
Note
Article 138(1) EPC does not stipulate who may initiate revocation proceedings. In France, these can apparently only be started by an accused infringer and only as far as the claims are alleged to be infringed. This makes filing opposition before the EPO even more important to consider.
See this post by Isabelle Romet about the restrictions on starting revocation proceedings in France.
As explained in that post, a time limit of 5 years may also apply in France for starting revocation proceedings, possibly even starting from the publication of the application. However, this seems to be the subject of much debate.
An interesting question is, of course, whom the UPCA will allow initiating (central) revocation proceedings.
As explained in that post, a time limit of 5 years may also apply in France for starting revocation proceedings, possibly even starting from the publication of the application. However, this seems to be the subject of much debate.
An interesting question is, of course, whom the UPCA will allow initiating (central) revocation proceedings.
This post has been kept in stock for some time.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Do not use hyperlinks in comment text or user name. Comments are welcome, even though they are strictly moderated (no politics). Moderation can take some time.