The proprietor of the patent requested a review of Opinion 11/09 which found that its patent was not infringed. The request argued that the opinion wrongly concluded that there was no infringement because it had misunderstood how the alleged infringing product worked. Such an argument is however outside the scope of Rule 98(5)(b) which provides for a review only on the ground that the opinion wrongly concluded that a particular act did not or would not constitute an infringement of the patent by reason of its interpretation of the specification of the patent in suit. The request for a review was therefore dismissed.
Judges:
Mr P Thorpe
Citations:
[2010] UKIntelP o08010
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 22 October 2022; Ref: scu.457895