Professional Service
Patents
Patents represent a key aspect of our clients’ intellectual property and may have significant commercial value, whether used to protect core technology, keep competitors out of a particular technical/commercial space, or as a source of revenue through licencing or assignment of rights. We understand that the role of patents may vary depending on the nature and life-stage of our clients’ businesses and seek to offer practical and tailored advice.
In drafting patent applications, we seek to define your inventions in a way that offers commercially-relevant protection, provides flexibility to address any unforeseen objections arising during prosecution, and ultimately provides valuable rights that can be defended and enforced, if required.
The Schlich attorneys adopt a creative and practical approach to prosecution, and have experienced considerable success through direct interaction with EPO and UKIPO Examiners. We can also advise on effective strategies for accelerating prosecution, or deferring costs, to reflect your commercial needs. We are also able to coordinate patent prosecution worldwide, either directly through the European and International (PCT) patent systems or by working through established relationships with trusted foreign law firms.
The Schlich patent team have developed considerable experience, and a proven track record of success, in EPO opposition and appeal proceedings (both offensive and defensive). We are also able to advise on, and propose practical solutions to, potential freedom-to-operate and infringement issues.
Recent Insights
Read the latest insights from the Schlich team reporting recent cases and updates to patent law.
UniQure’s Haemophilia B gene-therapy patent found valid – and infringed by Pfizer
The range of gene-therapies available to patients is ever expanding and it was only a matter of time before a conflict arose that had to be considered by the UK patent courts. Now uniQure has defended its patent for a Haemophilia B gene therapy against a revocation action brought by Pfizer.
Tales of Equivalence in the USA
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit has confirmed it is insufficient to allege two features are equivalent for a finding of equivalence to be reached. Instead, the party alleging equivalence needs to show how the variant achieves substantially the same result, in substantially the same way, as the corresponding feature of the claim.
The Battle Between NanoString and 10x Genomics Continues with NanoString Taking the Lead Following Successful UPC Revocation Action
The latest revocation action decided on by the Munich Central Division of the UPC gives NanoString the upper hand in their ongoing dispute with 10x Genomics, while also offering a useful insight into how the UPC appear to be approaching the assessment of inventive step
UPC Court of Appeal Shifts Focus to Germany
We recently reported on the UPC’s decision to hear the Nokia v Mala case, regardless of parallel German proceedings pending for the same patent. Interestingly, the UPC Court of Appeal has reacted quickly with a different view. This update is reported here.
Your Court or Mine? UPC takes home advantage
Nokia filed two separate revocation actions challenging Mala’s EP 2 044 709 patent, valid only in Germany. The first was filed on 29 April 2021 in the German Federal Patent Court but was unsuccessful, as the patent was upheld (appeal pending). The second was filed on 15 December 2023 in the Unified Patent Court (UPC). This article focuses on Mala’s objection to the UPC's jurisdiction, in which they argued that since a revocation action was already ongoing in Germany, the UPC should reject Nokia’s action as inadmissible.
The Federal Circuit clarifies conflicts arising between Patent Term Adjustment and Obviousness-type Double Patenting
We perceive a sigh of relief from some patent holders following issue of the US Federal Circuit’s decision in Allergan USA v. MSN Labs, 24-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2014) (“Allergan”). This decision appears to forestall the revocation of some patents following the concerning precedential Federal Circuit decision In re Cellect (No. 22-1293) (“Cellect”).
First Revocation Decision of the UPC Confirms the European Approach to Antibody Inventions
This case represents the first revocation issued by the UPC and so gives several useful insights into the way in which the court will apply the law.
Food for fork: stretchy cheese and contradictory post-filed evidence
T 0629/22 considered how the credibility of a claimed invention should be addressed in the face of contradictory evidence
Get in touch
Our team of UK and European Patent Attorneys and Chartered Trade Mark Attorneys are highly knowledgeable and experienced in assisting clients with all aspects of their IP needs.
Contact us now to find out more about how we could help you and your business.
