IPO Mr Parfitt requested a review of opinion 1/10. That opinion had concluded that neither Axium Process nor Ceres Power were infringing Mr Parfitt’s patent. Mr Parfitt argued that the opinion should be set aside because the examiner has misinterpreted the patent and in particular had failed to give due weight to a particular feature of the invention. The Hearing Officer found that the examiner had not misinterpreted the patent and so did not set aside the opinion.
Citations:
[2010] UKIntelP o39410
Links:
Intellectual Property
Updated: 22 October 2022; Ref: scu.458139
