ICO This decision concerned whether the patent in suit should be restored following a failure to pay the renewal fee. In December 2000 and January 2001respectively two patent applications were filed for the same invention – a British (GB) application and a European (EP) application, the latter designating amongst other countries, GB and claiming priority … Continue reading Orkli (UK) Limited (Patent): IPO 30 Sep 2009
IPO The Hearing Officer found that the proprietor, represented by the General Manager (the Directing Mind), had effectively taken reasonable care to see that the sixteenth year renewal fee was paid by issuing standing instructions that renewal fees should be paid automatically on any overseas patent which was licenced, even if its Japanese parent patent … Continue reading Sumitomo Rubber Industries Limited (Patent): IPO 14 Nov 2003
IPO Judging from the various activities the proprietor was engaged in and the range of problems he was effectively dealing with during the period the eighth year renewal fee could have been paid, the stress the applicant was experiencing was not such as to prevent him from acting in a reasonable manner. Moreover, the applicants … Continue reading Interroof Products Limited (Patent): IPO 18 Jan 2002
IPO In early January 2002, Bruker SA assigned the patent in suit to Hightechcare SA. The patent was to be paid for in instalments ending on 31st December 2003, so Bruker insisted on keeping the files until that date. The assignment contained no arrangements as to who should renew the patent in the period until … Continue reading Bruker Sa (Patent): IPO 21 Jul 2006
