7

Basically patents are territorial grants, that is to say a patent granted in the US is enforceable in the US and cannot be enforced in other countries. To answer your question US entities cannot enforce US software patents or for that matter any US patents in the UK. I am certain about this, but back-up and constructive criticism is welcome.


6

And in addition to the above answer, you can check if a divisional has been filed but is not yet published at the "Event History" tab of the page Maca provided already. It displays a message reading "Change - divisional application(s)" and on the far right the date on which the filing of the divisional will be announced at the EP Bulletin. This is ...


5

On the EP register, there is a specific field called "Divisional application(s)". This is only shown where there is actually a divisional application. An example of this can be seen on EP 11749534. This shows EP 16178435 is a divisional. If you want to find more divisionals generally, one approach is to search for an application having an application date ...


4

There are three scenarios. These differ based on the time difference between the first patent application (EP1) being filed and the second patent application (EP2) being filed. EP2 is filed 18 months (or more) after EP1 In this case, EP1 will be published. There is no difference between your own publication and one by another party. If, in view of EP1, ...


4

We are confused where to register the patent? US or Europe? Patents are territorial. If you want to prevent competitors from using your invention in the US, then you'll need a US patent. If you want to prevent competitors from using your invention in Europe, then you'll need a European patent. Similarly for any other country you're interested in. The ...


4

'non entry' means the applicant did not file with EPO for national phase stage after wipo (PCT) stage. This has no implication on patent application with USPTO. Patent prosecution in USPTO sometimes take much more than your expected four years. After approval i.e. notice of allowance and fees due, if the applicant does not pay fees due in time allowed than ...


3

The INPADOC database of patent family members lists this patent as having no family members other than its own publication and its provisional application. iNPADOC does not cover all countries but it does cover Europe. Therefore there is not a related, corresponding patent in Europe. Another way to check this is to do a search at the EPO under the inventor's ...


3

First of all, your understanding of 54(3) EPC seems to be right. More information can be found in the guidelines for examination where one can also read that the EP application has to be valid (e.g. not withdrawn) at the date of publication to qualify as prior art for 54(3). Could the EP application be allowed to grant if the PCT application has not yet ...


3

From the above I come to the conclusion that the unity objection is raised because claim 1 was found non-inventive (non compliance with Art. 56) and therefore the single general inventive concept exists no more for the depended claims 2-11 (I assume they were dependent to 1). Same goes for (independent?) claim 12, which is considered to lack inventive step, ...


3

Although I'm not a lawyer, I have tried to research this in relation to the UK. Other European countries may be different. I'd be interested if anyone knows if any of the following is incorrect. If a default judgement is issued by a US court it is not directly enforceable in the UK. The judgement may be a monetary award and/or an injunction preventing ...


3

The effects of granted patents (including European patents) in Germany are defined in the Patentgesetz. Relevant for your question is probably §11.1, according to which non-commercial activities in the private area are not affected by patent protection. In any case, according to §9, patents only concern activities such as the production, sale or use of a ...


3

This kind of thing was previously considered patent eligible (and some examples were found to be novel and non-obvious and granted patents) but they aren't considered patent eligible any longer. A somewhat well known patent 6,128,415 of Polaroid's - "Device profiles for use in a digital image processing system", that covers a data structure for a profile ...


3

Yes. You already cited the correct source, a further one would be art. 54 (2), (3) EPC: (2) The state of the art shall be held to comprise everything made available to the public by means of a written or oral description, by use, or in any other way, before the date of filing of the European patent application. (3) Additionally, the content of ...


3

While there are international treaties regarding patent systems, the laws and procedures of the USPTO and the EPO are not the same. However, many EPO filings from US applicants are just a reformating of their U.S. applications. In general, the EPO is more strict, particularly on claiming combinations and permutations of feature and the charge for excess ...


2

The answer can be derived from the register of European patents. It tells you that examination was requested in March, and that in May the applicant filed amended claims (and thus the application is still pending). Further, if you click on the 'all documents' tab in the left upper corner of the page, you will be directed to the file itself where you can view ...


2

There are three main provision of the laws that might cause you problem and they all involve exporting to the US or encouraging others to do so. The primary statute on point is 35 U.S.C. 271(a)-(c). (a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United ...


2

Under the EPC, computer programs are excluded from patentability (Art. 52(2)), but only as such (Art. 52(3)). Consequently, workarounds for claim wording have been developed (see this EPO powerpoint presentation): "computer program product", "storage medium comprising instructions...", "data processing apparatus comprising means for carrying out steps..." ...


2

The legal basis for claiming priority in the EP is Article 87. Paragraph 1 reads "Any person who has duly filed, in or for (a) any State party to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property or (b) any Member of the World Trade Organization, an application for a patent, a utility model or a utility certificate, or his successor in ...


2

In the UK, this wording derives the Patents Act 1977 s 1(2), which provides (emphasis added): It is hereby declared that the following (among other things) are not inventions for the purposes of this Act, that is to say, anything which consists of - (a) a discovery, scientific theory or mathematical method; (b) a literary, dramatic, musical or ...


2

It means exactly what you think. The website is merely saying that there always is a way to make software be not software - claiming it as the physical interaction and not as software. Which is why saying software as such (meaning software as software) is not patentable can be interpreted as software is patentable as long as it is not claimed as software ...


2

I was able to find what I was looking for at the European Patent Register. I found a patent application that looked promising and then clicked on "All documents" on a menu on the side. That gave me a list of all correspondence between the European Patent Office and the applicant. Some of those were exactly the examples I was looking for.


2

One option is to file provisional in the US the same day as the nonprovisional with the claims exactly as you plan to have them in rest of the world and use it for priority. Since it is not examined, there are no claims-specific fees. Another approach is to add pseudo claims in the description. I have seen lists of "Aspects of the Invention" written like ...


2

So is this the extent of options for patent challenges at the EPO -- i.e. no options after 9 months? Correct. Once the 9 month opposition period finishes, the only way to revoke another person's patent is to commence a revocation action in each country. For example, if a European patent was validated in the UK, France, and Germany, this would require three ...


1

I am not a lawyer, but my opinion is that the data structure, as you describe it, would not be patentable. One requirement of a patent is inventiveness. I can see nothing inventive about storing data in a common data storage format. I suppose if you use the data or storage format in some unexpected way and gain an unexpected advantage, there might be a ...


1

"Business Ideas" cannot be patented, only novel processes that are not deemed wholly abstract. Thus, if you had a design for a new type of engine, you could seek a patent. But if you had an idea for a new type of business, such as an app that utilizes the Uber model to utilize ride sharing for delivery services, it would not be patent eligible.


1

Prior art for novelty and for inventive step is assessed worldwide, so it doesn't matter where the document originated, it has to be considered for patentability. For patent infringement only the countries your product enters or is produced in matter.


1

There is a potential danger that the student can be held liable for indirect or contributory infringement. This is the act of providing means that are essential for performing the infringing act while it was known or would be obvious that these means would be used for the infringing act. Of course - concurring with Dr. Falken - such an activity of providing ...


1

Edit: I thought OP was asking about a script developed on company time. As that is not the case, some parts of the answer are referencing this wrong. Just replace those in your mind with - It's almost certain that script belongs to you and not the company, unless some regulation explicitly states that you may not work on company related topics at home, which ...


1

So your question actually raises two issues, which I will cover separately. Can I patent a genetically modified animal? Yes. In the US, it has long been practice to allow claims to non-human animals. A clear statement of this is at MPEP § 2105: [From 1987,] the Patent and Trademark Office would now consider nonnaturally occurring, nonhuman ...


1

Espacenet (run by the European Patent Office) and Patentscope (run by WIPO) are both databases through which you can search for patents and patent applications. I believe Patentscope has somewhat greater coverage. In this sense, they are both quite similar to Google Patents. The European register is the legal register of all European patents and patent ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible