EPO November Changes 2016 - UPDATE

EPO November Changes 2016 - UPDATE

What are the changes? 

In relation to assignment recordal, there has been a change to the EPO’s practice, as opposed to any law change.  These changes are:

  1. Both (or all) parties to an assignment of a European application must have signed the transfer document, and evidence of this is required;
  2. A signatory on behalf of a corporate entity must give their precise job title.

 

When did the change to assignment recordal come into effect?

From the 1st November 2016.

 

What does this mean for IP owners/IP agents?

In the UK and Europe, it has long been good practice (and often legally required) for both parties to sign an assignment document – that’s just basic contract law.  However, in the US, it is not unusual for an assignment document to have been signed by only the assignor.  We have had several instances recently where a US attorney has effected an assignment of a portfolio or family of patents and applications, including one or more European applications, using an assignment document signed only by the assignor.  Whilst this is perfectly reasonable under US law and practice, this document cannot now be used to effect the recordal of the assignment of the European application(s) at the EPO.  The only recourse, in these cases, has been to try and execute a confirmatory assignment in respect of the European application(s) using a contract signed by both parties.  Not only is this inevitably more costly, but in some cases it is very difficult (or even impossible) to get both parties to sign such a document – the Assignor may be unavailable or unwilling to sign such a document after the main assignment has been executed.  Where the Assignor is a company that is no longer in existence, such a confirmatory assignment may not be valid, and alternative measures may need to be sought, further increasing the cost and complexity of (what should be) a simple assignment recordal.

 

Our advice

In countries e.g. the USA, where it is typical or at least not unusual for an assignment document to include only the assignor’s signature, consider what is being assigned.  If a family or portfolio of patent applications, including one or more EP applications, is being assigned, consider using an assignment that is executed by both (or all) parties.  If, for some reason, that is not feasible, consider preparing and executing a separate assignment document just for the European application(s) for use in the assignment recordal process at the EPO.

 

 

Related News

news

Coronavirus - UK IPO, EPO and EU IPO extensions and support

A simple overview of the current status from IPOs. Last updated 16th March 2020. 

EPO announces extensions to deadlines due to COVID-19
news

EPO announces extensions to deadlines due to COVID-19

On Sunday 15 March 2020 the EPO published a notice advising it is invoking the provisions of Rule 134(2) EPC, and has extended all periods expiring on or after publication of the notice to 17 April 2020. This may be extended by the EPO upon publication of a further notice.

EUIPO extends all deadlines for Community Design and European Union Trade Marks
news

EUIPO extends all deadlines for Community Design and European Union Trade Marks

The Executive Director of the EUIPO has today (16 March 2020) issued a decision regarding extensions for all time limits on trade mark and design matters at the EUIPO. In accordance with the decision, all time limits expiring between 9 March 2020 and 30 April 2020 inclusive are extended until 1 May 2020.

news

UK IPO announces support for those affected by coronavirus

In brief, the UK IPO has indicated that it will use its discretionary powers (on a case-by-case basis) to extend time limits where possible under national and international law.

*Update* “EPO Board of Appeal finds Broad Institute’s CRISPR patent to lack valid priority claim and upholds revocation of patent (T 0844/18)”
news

*Update* “EPO Board of Appeal finds Broad Institute’s CRISPR patent to lack valid priority claim and upholds revocation of patent (T 0844/18)”

Earlier this year, we reported on the EPO Board of Appeal’s decision to uphold the revocation of the Broad Institute’s CRISPR patent (here). Now it appears that the Broad Institute is gearing up to put forward a petition for review by the Enlarged Board of Appeal as a last resort to save their patent.

news

The UPC is dead, long live the UPC!

European patent attorneys have been getting excited about the Unitary Patent (UP) and Unified Patent Court (UPC) for years, writing articles, and giving talks and presentations about the ins-and-outs and twists-and-turns of the whole thing. So what is the current situation? What has happened now?

news

EPO official fees to increase on 1 April 2020

The EPO adjusts its fees every two years. The EPO has now announced the next set of fee adjustments, which will come into effect on 1 April 2020. Full details of the fee increases are listed here and here. Overall, the EPO has implemented a general inflation-based 4% increase in official fees.

aipex logo aipex logo aipex logo