Mathys & Squire Intellectual Property
chinese site
japanese site
korean site
  • Home
  • Why Us
  • Services
  • People
  • News & Views
  • Careers
  • Knowledge Bank
  • Contact Us
  • Client Portal

Why Us

Intellectual Property (IP) can be one of the most important assets of a corporation.  We make it our business to understand your business.  Then we set out the issues, the opportunities and the variables in the language you understand.  Mathys & Squire have over 100 years of experience in IP.

Commercial Awareness

Advice that makes commercial sense and adds value...

Creative Insight

Securing valuable IP rights through identifying opportunities...

Committed to Clients

In everything we do we remain focused on our clients...

Collaborative Approach

We work cooperatively to provide clients with efficient solutions...

Contentious Expertise

An enviable reputation for winning even the most difficult of cases...

Clear Advice

Clear communication without hiding behind legal jargon...

Services

We are a full service firm dedicated to maximising the value of your technologies, brands and designs that can: Analyse the complexities of your technology; Focus world-class skills and expertise on adding value to your business; Develop an IP strategy within your commercial plans; and Communicate with you clearly and advise pro-actively.

Technology

Patents - counselling on opportunities and risks...

Branding

Trade Marks - advising on advantages and risks...

Designs

Registered and unregistered design rights...

Business Advice

Assessment of protection provided by IP rights, enforceability...

Due-Diligence

Commercial IP agreements, transactions...

Oppositions

European Patent Office oppositions and appeals, litigation, mediation...

Careers

We a growing, vibrant firm which understands the value of its staff and provides a challenging and rewarding environment in which to work.

Attorneys

We are always looking to add high quality attorneys...

Graduate Recruitment

Graduates play an important role in the development of our firm...

Support Staff

Our support staff are a dedicated team...

Knowledge Bank

Helping you to better understand IP by providing information relevant to your business.

Technology

 Technology related IP information...

Branding

Branding related IP information...

Design

Design related IP information...

Useful Links

Websites with useful information for better understanding IP...

SME

Information for small and medium enterprises...

Contact Us

MATHYS & SQUIRE LLP
120 Holborn
London, EC1N 2SQ
United Kingdom
Tel:  +44 (0)20 7830 0000
Fax: +44 (0)20 7830 0001

London

Tel:  +44 (0)20 7830 0000
Fax: +44 (0)20 7830 0001

Cambridge

Tel:  +44 (0)1223 851820
Fax: +44 (0)1223 851821

Manchester

Tel:  +44(0)161 8705900
Fax: +44(0)161 8705901

Reading

Tel:  +44 (0)118 9497149
Fax: +44 (0)118 9497150

York

Tel:  +44 (0)1904 567720
Fax: +44 (0)1904 567721

  • 2012 Archive
  • 2011 Archive
  • 2010 Archive
  • 2009 Archive
  • 2008 Archive
  • 2007 Archive
  • 2006 Archive
  • Home

Legal Updates

 

Significant European Patent Office Procedural Changes Coming 2010

New two year time limit for filing European divisionals

EPO change of rules regarding divisional applications 

The European Patent Office Administrative Council has agreed substantive changes to the time limits for filing divisional applications as set out below.   

Time limits for filing divisional applications 

From 1 April 2010, divisionals must be filed within 24 months of either: 

  • the issuance of the first communication from the Examining Division; or
  • the issuance of a lack of unity objection. 

There will be a six-month grace period up to the end of September 2010 for filing divisional applications where the 24 month period has already expired or will expire before the end of September 2010. 

Further Processing will NOT be available to extend these time limits.

Language for filing divisional applications

Under the new rules, where a parent application was originally filed in a language other than English, French or German, any new divisional applications may be filed in the language of filing of the parent application.

Multiple claims in one category, effect on Search (New Rule 62a EPC) – Two-month period to select one claim in each category 

Where an application has more than one independent claim in each category (method, apparatus, product) and the EPO considers that the subject-matter defined in those claims does NOT involve:

(a)   a plurality of inter-related products;

(b)   different uses of a product or apparatus;  or

(c)   alternative solutions to a particular problem (where it is inappropriate to cover these alternatives by a single claim)

new Rule 62a EPC will require the applicant, within a period of two months of notification, to identify one independent claim from each category to be searched.  Further processing will NOT be available (amended Rule 135(2) EPC).  If the applicant fails to respond within the time period, the search will be carried out on the basis of the first claim in each category.

The Examining Division will require restriction to the subject-matter searched, unless the objection is unjustified.

Incomplete search (Rule 63 EPC) – Two-month period to clarify matter to be searched

In order to reduce the number of incomplete Search Reports and declarations of no search, the EPO will allow Examiners to contact applicants during the search phase in order to seek clarification of what must be searched.

Accordingly, Rule 63 EPC is being amended to give the applicant a period of two months to provide clarification of the subject-matter to be searched where the EPO considers that it is impossible to carry out a meaningful search. If a statement indicating the subject-matter to be searched is not filed in due time, or if it is not sufficient to overcome the deficiency noted under paragraph 1, the EPO will, as before, either issue a declaration of no search or, as far as is practicable, draw up a partial Search Report. Further processing will NOT be available (amended Rule 135(2) EPC).

When a partial Search Report has been drawn up, unsearched subject-matter will need to be excised from the application and cannot be used as basis for amendments, as in the case of non‑unity.

Lack of Unity at Search Stage (Rule 64, paragraph 1 EPC) – Fixed two-month period for paying further search fees

If the Search Division considers that an application does not comply with the unity requirements of Article 82 EPC, it will draw up a partial Search Report for the invention first mentioned in the claims. 

At present, the EPO invites the applicant to pay an additional search fee for each further invention to be searched within a period of two to six weeks. However, under new Rule 64(1) EPC, the period for paying the additional search fess will be fixed at two-months. As before, further processing will NOT be available (Rule 135(2) EPC).

Compulsory response to the extended European Search Report (Rule 70a EPC)

Currently, the EPO drafts an opinion on patentability to accompany the Search Report for: (i) European applications; and (ii) international applications that enter the European regional phase and for which a supplementary Search Report must be drawn up (i.e. where the EPO was not the International Searching Authority (ISA)).

An applicant is however not obliged to reply to this “search opinion”.  Instead, the applicant can defer making any necessary amendments and/or arguments until after receipt of that first Office Action

New Rule 70a EPC will require the applicant to substantively respond to this search opinion within the period for paying the examination fee (i.e. within six-months of publication of the Search Report).  Alternatively, if the examination fee has already been paid prior to the search being carried out, or a supplementary European Search Report has been drawn up on a Euro-PCT-application, Rule 70a EPC will require the applicant to substantively respond to the opinion within a period specified by the EPO.

If no response is filed within the required time period, the application shall be deemed to be withdrawn. However, Further Processing may be used to revive the application.

Compulsory Response to IPRP or IPER required shortly after regional phase entry at the EPO  (Rule 161 EPC) 

At present, shortly after European phase entry, the EPO invites an applicant to amend the application under Rule 161 EPC within a time limit of one month.

However, from 1 April 2010, where the EPO was the International Searching Authority (ISA) and so issued the IPRP or acted as the International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) and so issued the IPER, the Rule 161 communication will require the applicant to:

  • comment on and/or correct any deficiencies noted in the IPRP or in the IPER; and
  • amend the description, claims and drawings, where appropriate.   

In the event that the applicant does not file a substantive response within the required time period of 1 month from notification, the application will be deemed to be withdrawn.  The Further Processing provisions may be used to revive the application. 

These changes will take effect from 1 April 2010.  Accordingly, amended Rule 161 will be relevant for PCT applications that are currently in the International Phase, that is PCT applications that are due to enter the European regional phase around 1 April 2010. 

For ex-PCT applications where the ISA is other than the EPO, the situation remains unchanged, i.e. the applicant will receive a communication from the EPO after European phase entry, providing an opportunity to file amendments to the application within a time limit of one month.  The Supplementary Search will be carried out on the basis of the application as so amended.

Changes to Amendment procedure (Rule 137 EPC) – Greatly limited!

A number of changes will be made to the amendment provisions under Rule 137 EPC:

  •  At the moment, the applicant may amend the application of his own volition after receipt of the Search Report and in response to the first Office Action from the EPO. However, the ability to file voluntary amendments (i.e. not at the Examiner’s discretion) is being limited. Under new Rule 137 EPC, an applicant may only amend the description, claims and drawing of his own volition when responding to (a) the search opinion under Rule 70a EPC (see above); or (b) the new Rule 161 EPC communication.
  •  The EPO is amending Rule 137 EPC to force an applicant to indicate the basis for amendments in the application as filed.  If the applicant does not comply, the Examining Division may request the applicant to indicate such basis within a time limit of one month.  If the applicant does not respond, the application will be deemed to be withdrawn (Further Processing may be used to revive the application).
  • The EPO is also changing Rule 137 EPC to clarify that applicants cannot introduce claims which have not been searched under new Rule 62a EPC (i.e. multiple claims in one category) or 63 EPC (i.e. subject-matter that does not comply with the requirements of EPC such that no meaningful search can be made).

Information about publication (Rule 69 EPC)

The EPO issues a Communication under Rule 69 EPC which informs an applicant about the date of publication of the search report and also draws attention to the date for filing the request for examination (six months from publication of the Search Report). 

This Rule is being amended to ensure that the Communication also draws attention to the date for responding to the search opinion (i.e. new Rule 70a, paragraph 1 EPC (see above)).

Entry Into Force

The above changes will enter into force on 1 April 2010.  New Rules 62a, 63, 70a and 137 will apply to European patent applications for which the European Search Report or the supplementary European Search Report is drawn up on or after 1 April 2010, whilst new Rule 161 will apply to European patent applications where a communication under current Rule 161 has not been issued before 1 April 2010.

In view of the short time period set by the Rule 161 communication, the objections raised in the IPRP or IPER should at least be considered when entering the regional phase before the EPO. Your usual Mathys & Squire contact will be happy to discuss how best to address the new procedure, and how to respond to those objections which relate specifically to European practice.

For further information please click on the links to see the official EPO notices below.

  • Decision of the Administrative Council of 25 March 2009 amending the Implementing Regulations to the European Patent Convention (CA/D 2/09) 
  • Decision of the Administrative Council of 25 March 2009 amending the Implementing Regulations to the European Patent Convention (CA/D 3/09) 

 

 

Help for your Business?

If you would like discuss the relevance of this case to your business please contact one of the following:

 

Receive updates

To receive newsflashes on IP events or our 'News & Views' please click on the button below

Get email updates

Keep informed

Email
Follow Us On Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook

 

Quick links

  • Technology
  • Branding
  • Designs 
  • Business Advice
  • Due-diligence  
  • Oppositions

 

 

London Office

120 Holborn
London EC1N 2SQ
T +44(0)20 7830 0000
F +44(0)20 7830 0001

Cambridge Office

T +44(0)1223 851820
F +44(0)1223 851821

Manchester Office

T +44(0)161 8705900
F +44(0)161 8705901

Reading Office

T +44(0)118 9497149
F +44(0)118 9497150

York Office

T +44(0)1904 567720
F +44(0)1904 567721

Legal Notices | Environmental Policy | Privacy Policy | Site Map

All references to Mathys & Squire, where content permits, are references to Mathys & Squire LLP which is regulated by IPReg

Patents | Designs | Trade Marks | Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) | Plant Varieties | Domain Names | Searches | Watches | Renewals

© Mathys & Squire LLP 2012