The European Patent Office has just published preliminary figures which show that the number of applications filed at the EPO in 2011 were 3% higher than the number of filings in 2010. This is made all the more impressive because 2010 was a record breaking year for patent applications being filed at the EPO. The number of patents granted in 2011 also rose by 7% compared to 2010.
Patent Application Filings at the EPO Increased in 2011
Patent Box Update
On 6th December 2011, draft legislation on the Patent Box was published following on from the Government’s proposal to reduce the rate of company tax to 10% on profits made from patents and patented products.
'Patenting of business methods in Canada'
Canadian Court of Appeal Decision Indicates Business Methods may be Patentable in Canada
An appeal based on Amazon, Inc’s application to patent its “one click” method has resulted in the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal concluding that there is no Canadian case law that determines conclusively that a business method is excluded from patentability in that country (Commissioner of Patents v. Amazon.com, Inc.
).
Although the decision may not directly improve the chances of Amazon obtaining a patent in their particular case (it cast doubt on whether the one-click method is simply an unpatentable abstract idea – a question that the Canadian Patent Office will now need to consider), it does give a positive indication that the Canadian Patent Office may be more open to grant patents for inventive business methods in future.
CJEU clarifies scope of SPC protection
On 24th November 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) gave its judgment, clarifying the scope of protection afforded by Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) and the circumstances under which they can be granted. The ruling answers questions referred by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in the cases of Medeva and Georgetown.
SPCs are granted to compensate drug companies for the delay in getting their product to market after seeking regulatory approval. Although it is not a patent extension it does protect a product which is protected by a patent.
In the two cases in question the UK Intellectual Property Office refused to grant SPCs on the two parties’ products to vaccines on the basis that the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 were not met. The Regulation requires that the product which is the subject of a SPC application be both "protected by a basic patent" and the subject of a "marketing authorisation". The parties appealed the decisions and in each case the proceedings were stayed whilst questions were referred to the CJEU to clarify the meaning of the requirements of the Regulation.
Court of Justice of EU publishes ruling on the patentabilitiy of invention including uses of human embryos
Greenpeace challenged a granted patent in the Federal Patent Court of Germany which concerned isolating and purifying neural precursor cells produced from human embryonic stem cells used to treat neurological diseases. The patent was held invalid but the patent owner appealed to the Federal Patent Court. The Court decided to refer questions to the Court of Justice regarding the interpretation of the term "human embryo" as it is not defined in the Biotechnology Directive. The questions were:
· What is meant by the term ‘human embryo’ as it is not defined in the Biotechnology Directive?
· What is meant by the expression “uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes?
· Is the technical teaching patentable even if the use of human embryos does not form part of the technical teaching claimed in the patent but is necessary for the application of that teaching?