Patent Litigation in Europe - Presence and Future



Similar documents
Patents in Europe 2013/2014

PATENT LITIGATION INSURANCE

Patent Litigation in Germany An Introduction (I)

Yearbook. Building IP value in the 21st century. Beyond the unitary patent: nothing new under the sun?

IP-Litigation in Germany. German and European Patent, Trademark and Design Attorneys Lawyers

IP Litigation in Europe and in Germany

An Enhanced European Patent System

Patent Litigation. Quick Guide to Proceedings in Germany HEUKING KÜHN LÜER WOJTEK

Application of Patent Litigation Strategies to Biosimilars: Is there a difference?

Present Situation of IP Disputes in Japan

Inspections and Access to Evidence in

Norway Advokatfirmaet Grette

Strong patents as a basis for successful patent litigation

Trends in Global Patent Litigation

Chapter 4 BELGIUM. In Belgium, three sets of rules can apply to the recognition and enforcement of foreign insolvency proceedings.

Analysis of National Approaches to PIL Issues in Cross-border Online IP Infringement Disputes

Cross-border patent litigation in Europe: change is coming. Ralph Minderop, Arwed Burrichter and Natalie Kirchhofer COHAUSZ & FLORACK

The revival of crossborder

Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation

U.S. Litigation (Strategic Preparations and Statistics)

Intellectual Property Office is an operating name of the Patent Office

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

International Patent Litigation and Jurisdiction. Study of Hypothetical Question 1 Under the Hague Draft Convention and Japanese Laws

GLOSSARY OF PATENT TERMINOLOGY

PATENT LITIGATION IN MEXICO: OVERVIEW AND STRATEGY

Efficient alternative dispute resolution (ADR) for intellectual property disputes

University of Calgary Mitacs Accelerate Internship Terms & Non Disclosure Agreements

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG... IP only.

Enforcement of judgments in civil matters in Switzerland

Subject Matter Conflicts The Next Wave in IP Malpractice Claims? How to spot the potential conflict and deal with it proactively.

EU Competition Law. Article 101 and Article 102. January Contents

Table of Contents CLAUDIA MILBRADT 1 ANETTE GARTNER 3

Ligitation process in Denmark 1. Litigation process in Denmark. A brief summary of the procedures and workings of the litigation process in Denmark.

Introduction. This answering guide has been prepared in order to make the task of responding to the questionnaire easier for citizens.

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY. Case No. CVCV036641

INTERNET USAGE AND THE POTENTIAL EFFECT IN YOUR MANAGEMENT OF YOUR PATENT PROGRAM. Steven D. Hemminger. Lyon & Lyon, LLP

Collaboration Agreement

Singapore International Commercial Court Practice Directions (Amendment No. 1 of 2016) Part X: Originating Processes and Documents

Transfer Pricing Audit Management

Patents for software?

Website Development Agreement

APPROVED Movant shall serve copies of this ORDER on

To the Legal Working Group of the Preparatory Committee

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA LYNCHBURG (CHARLOTTESVILLE) DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No. v.

How To License A Patent From Ancient Recipe Cards

NPSA GENERAL PROVISIONS

"Owner" "Designer" 1. Description of the Services. "Website" Schedule A "Services" 2. Design Team. "Design Team" 3. Term / Scheduling.

Europe. NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR DIVIDEND WITHHOLDING TAX REFUNDS EU / EEA Tax Exempt Entities Handbook

Designs. Denmark Mette Bender Awapatent A/S. A Global Guide

Finland. Contributing firm Roschier Brands, Attorneys Ltd

Intellectual Property Rights in the USA

Our patent and trade mark attorneys are here to help you protect and profit from your ideas, making sure they re working every bit as hard as you do.

Global Guide to Competition Litigation Poland

THE FOLLOWING ARE INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE FRONT SIDE OF SEAGATE PURCHASE ORDERS:

Recent developments regarding Mexico s tax treaty network and relevant court precedents

Rules of Procedure ( Rules ) of the Unified Patent Court

PLEASE NOTE: THIS POLICY WILL END EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 10, 2013 AND WILL BE REPLACED BY THE INTERACTIVE RESOLUTION POLICY ON NOVEMBER 11, 2013.

MARD. Issues Arising from the Mutual Assistance in the Recovery of Debts Directive. Aparna Nathan

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT, FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA.

Terms and Conditions for Tax Services

Judicial performance and its determinants: a cross-country perspective

Services Agreement between Client and Provider

Case 2:13-cv JWS Document 413 Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 3:11-cv RCJ-WGC Document 96 Filed 12/18/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Case4:12-cv KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

(Notices) COUNCIL AGREEMENT. on a Unified Patent Court (2013/C 175/01)

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS IN LIMINE. BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.'s and

The Scope of IP in Germany: Current Trends

LITIGATION RETAINER AGREEMENT

EMPLOYEES GUIDE TO APPEALING A WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIM DENIAL

Applications for Three Kinds of Patents Received by SIPO from Home and Abroad (2010) Invention Utility Model Design Total. Share in total.

Case 2:07-cv SFC-MKM Document 132 Filed 05/27/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Towards a Single Market for Occupational Pensions Without Tax Obstacles

Sample Arbitration Clauses with Comments

A Practical Summary of the New Supreme Court Civil Rules for Clark Wilson LLP Insurance Clients

ONLINE GAMBLING BALANCING FREE TRADE & SOCIAL POLICY

european patent litigation strategy

Dispute Resolution knowhow Briefs

Case 2:07-cv JPM-dkv Document 85 Filed 01/08/2008 Page 1 of 8

Guide to WIPO Services

DEBT RECOVERY IN BELGIUM Law Firm Van Dievoet, Jegers, Van der Mosen & Partners

International Tax Alert

Transcription:

Patent Litigation in Europe - Presence and Future Innovation Support Training Program (ISTP) Module 2 / November 27, 2006 Christian W. Appelt German and European Patent and Trademark Attorney

Patent Litigation Procedures Territorial Rights Enforcement in principal national National Court Systems vary (DE: 13 specialized District Courts) Effect generally only nation-wide Cross-Border Litigation in Europe? Related Patents, national parts of EPC patent Defendant domiciled in country of dispute Remarkably restricted by recent dec. ECJ

Jurisdictions Key jurisdictions: UK, Germany and the Netherlands Important jurisdictions: France, Italy and Spain No deposition, no extensive discovery No juries

Courts and Judges UK: Patents County Court and Patents Court Germany: bifurcated Invalidity actions specialist Federal Patent Court in Munich Infringement actions: special chambers hearing IP actions, 50 per cent in Düsseldorf Netherlands: specialist exclusive jurisdiction for patents

Discovery/Disclosure UK: most like the US unlike rest of Europe: Mandatory obligation, search limited by proportionality Implied undertaking: disclosure cannot be used for other purposes Germany: historically, no provision for any discovery, although: Inspection of the allegedly infringing device is possible in principle New powers to order production of relevant documents

Financial Compensation Purely compensatory: no triple damages UK, Germany, Netherlands, Spain: Damages (reasonable royalty, profits gained, profits lost) / an account of profits France and Italy: Damages, no account of profits

Infringing Activities Products: Manufacturing Offering / Selling Import/Export Use of patented product Damages, no account of profits Method: Use Product being manufactured by protected method

Article 69 EPC and Protocol Article 69(1) EPC The extent of the protection conferred by a European patent or a European patent application shall be determined by the terms of the claims. Nevertheless, the description and drawings shall be used to interpret the claims.

Article 69 EPC and Protocol Article 69 (Protocol) Article 69 should not be interpreted in the sense that the extent of the protection conferred by a European patent is to be understood as that defined by the strict, literal meaning of the wording used in the claims, the description and drawings being employed only for the purpose of resolving an ambiguity found in the claims.

Article 69 EPC and Protocol Article 69 (Protocol) Neither should it be interpreted in the sense that the claims serve only as a guideline and that the actual protection conferred may extend to what, from a consideration of the description and drawings by a person skilled in the art, the patentee has contemplated. On the contrary, it is to be interpreted as defining a position between these extremes which combined a fair protection for the patentee with a reasonable degree of certainty for third parties.

Infringing Activities Literal Infringement: All features of at least one claim are realized Equivalent Infringement: One or more features of the claim are realized by equivalent means Direct Infringement Indirect Infringements Essential elements of the invention are provided

Defense Argumentation - I Product does not infringe Out of scope of protection Slightly dependent on jurisdiction Language? (national, max: language of proceedings) (patent) right exhausted (Patent) right is not valid? Country / IPR dependent DE: Utility Model (unexamined) (+) DE: Patent (national/epc) (-) Separate Invalidation / Nullity procedure Generally nation-wide (but, EPC-opposition)

Defense Argumentation - II Prior Use Right Not freely transferable Can be sold with the complete business Amendments might be restricted Research Exemption Exhaustion of Patent Rights Internationally: No EU-common market exhaustion Product/Method is within the Prior Art Only in case of Equivalency DE: Formsteineinwand

Time Frame and Costs Extremely Country Dependent (DE.IT, US, ) 1 st instance decision: 1-5 years 2 nd instance decision: 1-5 years Cost risk Generally dependent on amount of dispute Losing party has to reimburse cost/fees? DE: 1 year, Euro 100.000 to 250.000 cost risk reimbursement US: 2..3 years, each year US$ 400.000 to 1.000.000 No reimbursement

Interlocutory Injunction Einstweilige Verfügung (Germany) Schutzschrift (Protective Writ) Action en referée (France) Kort geding (summary proceedings to obtain a preliminary injunction (Netherlands) Provisional injunctive measures (Belgium, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Sweden)

European Patent Litigation Protocol European patent is a bundle of national patents Litigated in national courts and under national patent laws Group of EPC contracting states are negotiating a protocol for a single court system Includes UK, the Netherlands, Germany, France Objective: to create single 1st and 2nd instance court for infringement and validity Leaves some issues for national courts Enforcement Interlocutory injunctions

European Patent Litigation Protocol EPC Patents EPLP 4th Proposal (WPL/SUB 2/02, 31/05/02) EP Patent Court Structure Court of First Instance Central Division (Luxembourg?) Regional Divisions Court of Appeal Central (Luxembourg?)

EPLP Regional Divisions National or Regional At Start: max. 1 per Country After 3 Years: up to 3 per Country/Region if more than 100 cases annually heard in Country/Region Certainly Germany!

EP Patent Court Competence Litigation with Effect for all Countries chosen Revocation/Invalidation with Effect for all Countries chosen Countries involved to be chosen by Plaintiff

Miscellaneous Provisions Languages English, French, or German depending on EPC Language of proceedings 7 years Transition Competence of national Courts Effects of Decisions only nationally EP Court considered as National Court for EU (Art. 234 EU Treaty)

Problems. For initial 3 years: Only 1 Regional Division, e.g. in Germany No factual arguments in Appeal No sole representation by Patent Attorneys, even in Invalidation Actions

Further Questions? Contact me at: Appelt@Boehmert.de Christian W. Appelt Boehmert & Boehmert Pettenkoferstr. 20-22 D-80336 Munich Germany Tel.: + 49 89 55 96 80 Fax: + 49 89 34 70 10