Category: Intellectual Property

General Electric Company (Patent): IPO 29 Sep 2008

IPO The application relates to the blending of phosphors to achieve a blend absorbing EM radiation having a particular range of wavelengths and emitting light having wavelengths in a visible spectrum. The blend comprises (Tb,Y,Lu) 3Al5O12:Ce3+ and at least one other phosphor, including, among others, (Gd,La,Lu,Sc)2O3:Eu3+ and (Sr,Ca) MgAl10O17:Eu2+.
The Hearing Officer found that the invention was not novel in respect of the phosphors noted above and that more generally it did not involve an inventive step. He also concluded that the claim did not fall foul of s.14(5)(c) and that plurality might be overcome by amendment. Although the applicants have indicated that they do not wish to proceed further they have been given the opportunity to amend.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o26508

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457150

Abbas Yamkangaz (Patent): IPO 10 Sep 2008

IPO The invention (which could be computer implemented) provided: (1) a text, (2) a programme or instructions on how to solve a problem based on, and possibly contained in, the text, (3) a formula, not necessarily mathematical, and which could in simple cases constitute the programme, containing variables to be used in solving the problem, (4) a list of possible values of variables for insertion into the formula, (5) choice of values from the list in order to solve the problem; and (6) display of the resulting solution. Refusing the application, the hearing officer held that, insofar as the invention was new and had an inventive step, it contributed (applying the Aerotel test) solely in the above excluded fields and was not technical in nature.

Judges:

Mr R C Kennell

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o25508, O/255/08

Links:

Bailii

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457146

Rita Rusk Innovations and Wilson Gunn Llp (Patent): IPO 4 Aug 2008

IPO In decision BL O/109/08 the hearing officer considered an opposition to a request to amend a patent under Section 27. The hearing officer refused the request to amend and gave the parties an opportunity to make submissions on costs. The Opponent submitted a request for costs on the standard scale. No submissions were received from the Applicant. Since the Opponent was the successful party, the hearing officer made an award in their favour in the sum of pounds 500

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o22108

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457139

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Hybrid Air Vehicles Ltd (Patent): IPO 11 Aug 2008

IPO This was a preliminary hearing held before the evidence rounds has commenced to consider a request for amendment of the statement of claim; a request for disclosure of material disclosed in related US proceedings; and a contingent request that the comptroller decline to deal with the reference. Regarding the disclosure request, it was decided that even though the relevant documents had already been identified in the US proceedings, the quantity of material involved, the breadth of material covered, and the costs to the UK legal team, meant that the interests of justice would not be advanced by ordering the disclosure. Once this had been decided, the fact that the Court might be more ready to grant the disclosure sought than the comptroller could not be justification for declining to deal with the reference. It was also decided to allow amendment of the statement of claim by addition of a reference to a second patent, but not the inclusion of allegations of bad faith on the part of the defendant. The partial amendment as allowed was not considered to increase the complexity of the case so much as to warrant declining to deal with the reference.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o23508

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457131

Vortaloptics Inc (Patent): IPO 11 Aug 2008

IPO The application relates to a system for sorting and displaying search results from a plurality of indexes.
The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel/Macrossan test and decided that the contribution made by the invention fell solely within excluded matter. He also considered Symbian and concluded that the contribution was not technical in nature as set out in the fourth step of the Aerotel/Macrossan test. The application was refused as being a program for a computer as such.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o23408

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457144

Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc (Patent): IPO 13 Aug 2008

IPO For the more effective operation of multivariable process control systems, the invention modelled the process as two or more single-input single-output (SISO) models and selected a subset of the SISO models for adaptation on the basis of detected process conditions. The hearing officer held the claims novel over a citation in which, although a subset of the SISO controllers in a process was adapted, there was no modelling the process as a plurality of SISO models.
Amended system claims did not merely claim adaptation of the process model but also included the process control aspects. On excluded matter, the hearing officer applying the Aerotel test held that this made a contribution which went beyond merely using a plurality of SISO models in a multivariable process control system, did not relate solely to excluded matter and was technical in nature.
Since the method claims did not fully reflect this contribution, he allowed the applicant a period to submit further amendments.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o23808

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457124

World Properties Inc, Sankar K Paul, Luis D Borges and Allen F Horn Iii, Murali Sethumadhavan, Richard T Traskos and Michael E St Lawrence (Patent): IPO 7 Jul 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by Sankar K. Paul, Luis D. Borges and Allen F. Horn III, originally under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 though the application was subsequently taken as filed under rule 10(2) of the patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Sankar K. Paul, Luis D. Borges and Allen F. Horn III should also be mentioned as joint inventors in the granted patent for the invention. The comptroller directed that an addendum slip mentioning them as joint inventors be prepared for the published patent application and granted patent for the invention.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o19408

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457114

Cvon Innovations Limited (Patent): IPO 15 Aug 2008

IPO The invention concerns a mobile telecommunications system which modifies messages sent between particular users over a communications network. The users may be members of one or more ‘groups’ – such as an on-line discussion forum, club or society websites, or other such communities. Messages are modified on the basis of users’ membership of particular such groups, and further messages (back to the sender of the original message) are also generated. The modification to the message or the further message may, for example, be an advertisement or other promotional information relevant to the group membership of the sender or recipient.
The hearing officer followed the steps set out in Aerotel in order to determine whether the invention was excluded from patentability. Having considering the prior art and the interaction between the various features of the invention, he concluded that the contribution made by the invention lay in providing a method by which a party sending a message over a data communications network is sent a further message in the circumstances where the system determines that the sending party is not a member of a group of which the receiving party is a member.
He found that this contribution fell solely within excluded matter, as it was no more than a method for doing business and a program for a computer. Regardless of whether step four of the Aerotel test is an optional check or not, the hearing officer was in any event satisfied that the contribution made by the invention contained nothing which was technical in nature.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o24108

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457120

Symbian Software Ltd (Patent): IPO 31 Jul 2008

IPO In these related applications, ‘300 related to an extensible framework in which parsers and/or generators (P/G) were implemented as plug-ins with a common API that enabled a P/G to access data from any source conforming to the API, so that it was unnecessary to hard-code a client to cope with a specific P/G. ‘298 related to a mapping which enabled a client to use a unique integer value to map to either a text or a binary mark-up language so that the client could parse a document without needing to know its language. Applying the Aerotel test and refusing the applications as relating to computer programs as such, the hearing officer held that in each case any increase in processing speed arose because a program had been devised which made more efficient use of the computer’s resources and economised on the use of memory, and like Gale did not represent any process existing outside the computer or solve any problem in its operation. The hearing officer declined to extend the principle in Symbian [2008] EWHC 518 to the present applications and distinguished a number of other authorities cited at the hearing.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o21808

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457111

Cvon Innovations Ltd (Patent): IPO 28 Jul 2008

IPO The invention concerns the ranking of Internet search results in the context of mobile phone access to Internet content with content providers paying to improve their position in the ranking of search results. The invention takes into account the quantity of data to be transmitted, the cost of transmission and the payment offered by the content provider in determining the rankings. The hearing officer found the invention to be excluded from patentability as a method for doing business.

Judges:

P Marchant

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o21308

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1(2)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457090

NEC Corporation (Patent): IPO 15 Jul 2008

IPO The claims related to a method and apparatus for deciding the tilt angle of antennas in radio communication system. The examiner considered that the claims needed to be restricted to actual use in controlling antennas to avoid exclusion as a computer program, but the hearing officer (considering the mathematical method exclusion also) held that on the basis of VICOM (T 208/84), Astron Clinica [2008] RPC 14, Halliburton v Smith [2006] RPC 2 and Institut Francais and co (BL O/201/03) a step of outputting an optimal tilt angle for use in controlling the tilt angle sufficed to tether the claims to a patentable invention. The hearing officer also accepted that a proposed claim to a computer program product for implementing the method would not be open to objection under section 1(2).

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o20208

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457102

Dell Products L P (Patent): IPO 14 Jul 2008

IPO 1 The application relates to a system and method for managing data concerning service dispatches. In particular, the current system purports to identify service dispatches that require attention or are overdue for completion. For each service dispatch, a record is generated which includes data relating to the dispatch and a series of service milestones are set out for the completion of the service dispatch. The system monitors the extent to which milestones are met or more particularly are not met, whilst the service dispatch is open. The service dispatch records are sorted for display in a way which assists handling and resolution of the service dispatches. The service dispatch records are sorted for display according to a number of service milestones which have not been completed on time and have therefore been missed (‘missed milestones’). The service dispatch records are also sorted according to whether they have missed milestones and also have not been claimed by a customer service representative (‘unacknowledged milestones’). The service dispatch records are sorted for display so that those with ‘unacknowledged milestones’ are displayed as a matter of priority.
2 After taking into full consideration the applicant’s case presented by Mr Howe at the hearing, the examiner’s objections and also the patent specification, the hearing officer held that the inventions of both the current claim 1 on file and the proposed amended claim 1 presented by the applicant for discussion at the hearing, define non-patentable inventions which fall within the business method and program for a computer exclusions of section 1(2)(c).
3 The hearing officer subsequently refused the application under section 18(3) for failure to comply with section 1(2)(c).

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o19908

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457092

Daniele Grazioli and Elena Pasquali (Patent): IPO 29 Jul 2008

IPO The application relates to processing event data on a network. Data from an event is received at a node management program on one of a plurality of processors; the program determines, on the basis of that data, which event algorithm it needs to run and retrieves it from a shared storage area along with associated data relating to the characteristics of objects the algorithm will use and thence the data objects themselves, executing the algorithm and storing the result in the shared storage area. The shared storage area partitions its data over more than one persistence provider.
The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel/Macrossan test and decided that the actual contribution made by the invention fell solely within excluded matter and the application was refused as being a program for a computer.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o21408

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457091

Schlumberger Holdings Limited (Patent): IPO 21 Jul 2008

IPO The application relates to an apparatus, method and system; following a user request concerning a particular type of data, database attributes stored in a data base are accessed and, according to predefined rules, processed to formulate a different particular type of data. Data-specific data access layers are used with attributes defined in meta-data.
The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel/Macrossan test and decided that the actual contribution made by the invention fell solely within excluded matter. He also considered Symbian and, although any technical effect had already been considered, decided that the contribution was not technical in nature as might be required in the fourth step of the Aerotel/Macrossan test. The application was refused as being a program for a computer.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o20908

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457106

In The Pink (Trade Mark: Opposition): IPO 28 Jul 2008

Interlocutory Hearing in relation to a request by the Applicant for Security of Costs

Judges:

G Hobbs QC

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o24508

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Marks Act 1994

Cited by:

See Also – In The Pink (Trade Mark: Opposition) IPO 28-Jul-2008
At first instance (see BL O/135/08) the Hearing Officer had refused a request by the applicant that the opponent should be required to provide security for his costs. The Appointed Person having reviewed the Hearing Officer’s decision held that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457098

Msp Corporation, Nicholas C Miller, Virgil A Marple, Daryl L Roberts and Benjamin Y H Liu (Patent): IPO 16 Jul 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by MSP Corporation, originally under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 though the application was subsequently taken as filed under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Nicholas C Miller should also be mentioned as a joint inventor in the published patent application and granted patent for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him as a joint inventor be prepared for the published patent application and granted patent for the invention.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o20308, O/203/08

Links:

Bailii

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457101

Ge Medical Technology Services Inc (Patent): IPO 14 Jul 2008

IPO The invention concerns the identification of potential solutions to a problem associated with medical devices such as medical imaging systems. The complexity of these devices makes identifying and correcting problems difficult and time-consuming and the solution proposed by the applicant is to automate the fault-finding process. It does this by sending data, for example operating parameters, from the medical device to a server which searches a database containing historic data for the device. The server then uses the data from the medical device and the historic data to search a database of solutions to problems associated with the medical device and finally transmits potential solution(s) to a user. The user can then download the solution in the form of a program to the medical device. The hearing officer applied the Aerotel test, found the invention to be excluded as a computer program and a method for doing business and refused the application.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o19808

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457094

Smith International Inc (Patent): IPO 3 Jul 2008

IPO The invention related to a method of manufacturing a drill bit by designing the drill bit and then manufacturing it in accordance with the design. Only the design step were described or claimed in any detail: this involved simulating the performance of the drill bit whilst drilling through an earth formation, displaying the result graphically, varying a design parameter of the drill bit, and repeating the process until a performance characteristic was optimised. Following Halliburton and Cappellini/Bloomberg, the hearing officer held that this was patentable.
The hearing officer then applied the test laid down in Aerotel / Macrossan, and determined that the step involved in three of the four independent claims, that the adjustment was in accordance with the graphical display, was inventive. Claim 35 was held to lack this feature, and to be obvious in the light of the prior art cited.
The application was therefore remitted to the examiner for further amendment.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o19108

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457108

Abb Research Ltd, Sean Keeping, Roger Arnold, Martin Ashford, Steve Eeles and Others (Patent): IPO 18 Jul 2008

IPO An uncontested application was filed by ABB Research Ltd under rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007. As a result, it was found that Sean Keeping, Roger Arnold, Martin Ashford and Steve Eeles should also be mentioned as joint inventors in any patent granted for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning them as joint inventors be prepared for the published patent application for the invention.

Judges:

Mrs S Williams

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o20508

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 13(1)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457083

ATT Knowledge Ventures, LP (Patent): IPO 2 Jul 2008

IPO The invention provided, in a brokerage system which allowed a user to obtain digital content from third party providers via a networked system, a means to store information about the functionality and capability of one or more devices held by the user and supply the information to the provider so that the provider could supply content suitable for use on the device. Typically a ‘device profile table’ identified at least the type of device and the type of media that the device could play. Applying the Aerotel test ([2006] EWHC Civ 1371, [2007] RPC 7), the hearing officer held that the invention was excluded as both a computer program and as a business scheme or method. In his view the contribution did not embody any process existing outside a computer or cause the computer to process the information in any new technical way, and there was no technical contribution beyond that to be expected from loading a program (analogy drawn with Gale [1991] RPC 305). Nor did the hearing officer accept that the contribution required the presence of data and could not therefore relate solely to a computer program; even if data was part of the contribution it did not stop the contribution from being excluded as a program up and running (see Macrossan appeal in Aerotel).
The hearing officer did not accept that the examiner should have been obliged to carry out a search to establish the actual contribution.

Judges:

Mr R C Kennell

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o19008, GB 0602349.3

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1(2)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457085

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/186/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of prior disclosure of the alloy, an objection of novelty could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18608, O/186/08, GB 0725290.1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 2 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457058

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/187/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of prior disclosure of the alloy, an objection of novelty could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18708

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 2 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457059

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/188/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18808

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457060

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/185/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of prior disclosure of the alloy, an objection of novelty could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18508, O/185/08, GB 0721403.4

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 2 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457057

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/184/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of prior disclosure of the alloy, an objection of inventive step could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18408, O/184/08, GB 0721401.8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457056

Kenneth Farr; Orbis Corporation (Patent): IPO 11 Jun 2008

IPO Mr. Farr applied under section 37 of the Patents Act 1977 to be named proprietor/inventor of EP 1268313. The proprietors, Orbis, responded by requesting summary dismissal of Mr. Farr’s claim on the grounds that he had no reasonable chance of success and that the reference was made out of time under section 37(5) of the Act.
However, the evidence rounds have yet to be completed and the evidence to date satisfied the Hearing Officer that Mr. Farr did at least have a case to argue. Thus the Hearing Officer decided that it would be wrong to conclude that Mr. Farr had no reasonable chance of success. Orbis’ request for dismissal was thus refused.

Judges:

Mr P Back

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o16108, O/161/08, EP 1268313

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 37

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457054

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/183/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of anticipation, an objection of novelty could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18308, O/183/08, GB 0601393.2

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 2 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457055

Komatsu Ltd (Patent) O/189/08: IPO 30 Jun 2008

IPO The application related to a double-layered sintered sliding member used for a connecting device, such as a thrust bearing, of a construction machine. The invention was characterized by compositional features of the alloy used. The hearing officer held that the characterization by means of percentage components of constituents present in a martensite phase was did not involve unusual parameters and was not overly broad. He also held that in the absence of explicit evidence of prior disclosure of the alloy, an objection of novelty could not be upheld in this case. Further, he found that the specification was sufficient to enable reproduction of the invention. The application was remitted to the examiner for further processing.

Judges:

Mr J Elbro

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o18908

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1 2 3 14(3) 14(5)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457061

MSP Corporation, Nicholas C Miller, Virgil A Marple, Daryl L Roberts and Benjamin Y H Liu (Patent): IPO 22 May 2008

IPO As a result of an uncontested application filed under section 13(1) of the Patents Act 1977 by MSP Corporation, the relevant provision now being rule 10(2) of the Patents Rules 2007, it was found that Nicholas C Miller should also be named as a joint inventor in the published patent application and granted patent for the invention and directed that an addendum slip mentioning him as a joint inventor be prepared for the published patent application and granted patent for the invention.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o14508

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 13(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457038

IGT (Patent) O/149/08: IPO 23 May 2008

IPO The invention related to a gaming apparatus and method in which 2D image data was converted into a 3D video image and displayed on a non-planar 3D screen. The examiner had objected that the contribution of the invention was excluded under the above categories, but (although it was not apparent from the specification as originally drafted) the applicant argued that the invention lay in a technical improvement in the 3D image by virtue of its correction for image distortion, brightness distortion and colour aberration when displayed on a non-planar screen. The hearing officer asked the examiner to conduct a further search to determine whether this was conventional and gave the applicant an opportunity to comment on the results. In response the applicant filed amended claims in which a controller was programmed to correct for all three of the above defects. Applying the Aerotel test, the hearing officer held that these claims were not excluded under section 1(2) and remitted the application to the examiner for further consideration as to novelty and inventive step.

Judges:

Mr R C Kennell

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o14908, O/149/08, GB 0602813.8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Patents Act 1977 1(2)

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457032

Conversor Products Ltd (Patent): IPO 16 May 2008

The applicant applied to revoke his own patent on the ground that some of the claims lacked novelty and/or inventive step. No counter-statement was filed. The invention concerned a hearing aid system.
A broadly equivalent EP patent had already been revoked by the EPO for lack of inventive step following a successful opposition. The Hearing Officer found that one of the claims in this GB patent was significantly broader than the broadest claim in the EP patent, and was completely anticipated by prior art. Hence the patent, as it stood, was invalid. As there was no prospect of amendment under section 75, the Hearing Officer revoked the patent.

Citations:

[2008] UKIntelP o13908

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.457023