DOCSLIB.ORG

Specialist List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Specialist List GLOBAL LISTING Specialist List EUROPEAN PATENT AND TRADE MARK ATTORNEYS UK | FINLAND | FRANCE | GERMANY | IRELAND | ITALY | THE AMERICAS | SWITZERLAND CAPTURE Invention Capture IP Capture CREATE Innovation Support SECURE Registration IP Awareness Mentoring Opposition INTELLECTUAL Proceedings PROPERTY Appeals STRATEGY IP PROTECTION REGENERATE Restoration MANAGE Annuities IP Portfolio Management Renewals Landscape An ongoing cycle of innovation support. At Murgitroyd, we believe in ongoing support. We believe you need more than just patent and trade mark filings, renewals and nuts and bolts case prosecution. Our approach keeps your intellectual property and your business ahead of the competition. It’s based on a continuous process of innovation. It’s about planning, creating and developing IP, as well as responding to new opportunities as they arise. And it’s about helping you increase commercial return through a creative IP strategy that works in line with your objectives. We’ll help you build a strategy that identifies and acts on every opportunity to create meaningful, valuable IP. We’ll provide expert guidance whenever you need it. Our agile set-up means we’re responsive, flexible and dedicated to you. We’ll work side by side with you and your team to help you get ahead - and stay ahead. Discover how we can create value for you. Contact us: E: [email protected] W: murgitroyd.com EUROPEAN PATENT AND TRADE MARK ATTORNEYS UK | FINLAND | FRANCE | GERMANY | IRELAND | ITALY | THE AMERICAS | SWITZERLAND CONTENTS GLOBAL LIST Specialist List Page. Page. TRADE MARKS 4 CHEMISTRY, Aberdeen 5 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING Belfast 5 AND MATERIALS TEAM 23 Cardiff 5 Belfast 23 Croydon (see London) Croydon (see London) Dublin 5 Glasgow 23 Glasgow 5 London 24 Helsinki 7 Milan 24 London 7 Munich 25 Milan 9 Newcastle 25 Munich 9 York 25 Newcastle 10 Southampton 26 York 10 Nice 11 ELECTRONICS TEAM 27 Southampton 11 Cardiff 27 Cork (see Dublin) 27 PATENTS 12 Dublin 27 MECHANICAL TEAM 14 Glasgow 27 Helsinki 28 Aberdeen 14 Milan 29 Cardiff 15 Munich 29 Dublin 16 Newcastle 30 Glasgow 16 Nice 30 Helsinki 17 York 30 Milan 17 Southampton 30 Munich 17 Newcastle 18 DESIGNS 32 York 18 Nice 19 Aberdeen 33 Southampton 19 Cardiff 33 Croydon (see London) BIO/LIFE SCIENCES Dublin 33 AND HEALTH CARE TEAM 20 Glasgow 34 Helsinki 34 Dublin 20 London 34 Glasgow 20 Milan 35 Croydon (see London) Munich 35 London 21 Nice 35 Milan 21 Southampton 36 Munich 22 Nice 22 Southampton 22 TRADE MARKS OVERVIEW CAPTURE Mark Hickey CREATE Head of Practice - Trade Marks SECURE London STRATEGY REGENERATE European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Chartered MANAGE Trade Mark Attorney (UK), LLB, University of London BRAND PROTECTION STRATEGY: CREATE International Trade Mark Customs Surveillance Brand Ideation, Prosecution, and Anti-Counterfeit IP Awareness Mentoring, Mark Registration, Measures, IP Audits Domain Names, Transactions Copyright, CAPTURE Design Rights, REGENERATE Trade Mark, Design Registration, Litigation, Clearance Searches, Design Application Mergers, Trade Mark Search, Disposals, Name Clearance MANAGE Joint Venture, Watching Services, Agreements, SECURE Due Diligence, Assignment, Trade Mark Filing, Assignments, Change of Ownership, Trade Mark Application, Infringement, Cancellation Actions, Shape Protection, Trade Mark Portfolio, Acquisitions, 3D Trade Marks, Management, Fractional Ownership Certification Marks, Passing Off, Licence Agreements, Collective Marks, Oppositions, Renewals Trade Mark Registration Trade Mark Disputes, Programmes, Dispute Resolution, International Trade Mark Invalidity, Filing, Revocation, International Trade Mark Rectification, Application, Bona Vacantia, 4 GLOBAL LISTING murgitroyd.com/trade-marks TRADE MARKS TEAM Mike Vettese Director Aberdeen Joanne Lecky Director Belfast and Dublin European Trade Mark and Design European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), Attorney (UK), BEng (Hons) Electronic Registered Trade Mark Attorney (Ireland), Engineering (Sandwich Award), LLB Law, The Queen’s University of Belfast, University of Abertay MSc Management and Information Systems, The Queen’s University of Belfast, Diplôme Particular Expertise: music, media, d’études juridiques françaises, University of entertainment industries, oil and gas, Limoges renewable energy, beer, distillers, brewers, ale, whisky. Particular Expertise: fashion, retail, food and beverage, FMCG, media and entertainment. Huw Evans Attorney Cardiff Jacqueline McKay Director Glasgow European Trade Mark Attorney, Trade European Trade Mark and Design Mark Attorney, Chartered Patent Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Attorney Attorney (UK), European Patent (UK), European Patent Attorney Attorney, Chartered Engineer, BEng Chartered Patent Attorney (UK) Electrical and Electronic Engineering, BEng (Hons) Avionics, University of Nottingham Trent University Glasgow, Certificate in Intellectual Property Law, Queen Mary and Westfield Particular Expertise: electrical, College, University of London electronics, telecommunications, semiconductors, software. Particular Expertise: trade mark strategies, protection, disputes. 5 GLOBAL LISTING murgitroyd.com/trade-marks TRADE MARKS TEAM Christian Finn Director Glasgow Anne Bashir Director Glasgow European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), BSc Registered Trade Mark Attorney (Ireland), Computer Science, MSc Management of BL (Hons), University of Zimbabwe, Legal Intellectual Property, Queen Mary and Practitioner before the High Court of Westfield College, University of London Zimbabwe Certificate in Intellectual Property, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of Particular Expertise: beers and spirits, hotel London industry, hospitality, bars and restaurants, sports teams, sporting goods, financial and Particular Expertise: chemical and insurance services, outdoor equipment, biotechnology, computers and IT, finance, clothing and apparel, foodstuffs and whisky, fashion, entertainment, online confectionery, pharmaceuticals and biotech, gaming, online retailing, beauty, agriculture, engineering and construction services, water treatment, chemical processing, negotiation training. fish farming. Eleanor Coates Director Glasgow Chris Cairns Director Glasgow European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK) MA Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), BSc Economics, University of Glasgow Instrumentation with Applied Physics, Glasgow Caledonian University Particular Expertise: food and drink, retail consumer products, health and beauty, Particular Expertise: finance, banking, financial services, manufacturing, clothing, food and drink, beauty, fast moving online retailing, television and media, internet consumer goods, industrial manufacturing, services, mobile software applications, education, medical and fashion, textiles, clothing, games, medical services, pet telecommunications, automotive, healthcare, grooming, general merchandise and brand entertainment, renewable energy, retail and protection, trade mark clearance. on-line retail services. 6 GLOBAL LISTING murgitroyd.com/trade-marks TRADE MARKS TEAM Laura Mullen Trainee Attorney Glasgow Robert Ljungberg Director Helsinki CIPA Approved Certificate in Patent European Patent Attorney European Trade Administration, LLB Law (University of Mark and Design Attorney, M.S. Mechanical Strathclyde) Engineering, Institute of Technology at Linköping University, Sweden Executive Particular Expertise: healthcare, food and J. D. Concord University, USA, Certificate drink, cosmetics and beauty, clothing, fast in Intellectual Property Law, University of moving consumer goods, entertainment, London education. Particular Expertise: telecommunication, paper, medical devices, oil and gas, mechanical, computer technology. Mark Hickey Director London Dewdney Drew Director London European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), LLB, University of London, Fellow of The Registered Trade Mark Attorney (Ireland) Chartered Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys BLC, LLB University of Pretoria High Court Attorney (South Africa) Particular Expertise: pharmaceutical, FMCG, entertainment. Particular Expertise: music, entertainment, band name, fashion, financial services, aerospace, defence, vehicles, pharmaceuticals, mining machinery, energy, clean coal, renewables, whisky, beverage industry, heraldry. 7 GLOBAL LISTING murgitroyd.com/trade-marks TRADE MARKS TEAM Puravee Shah Director London Emma Hodson Director London European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, European Trade Mark and Design Attorney, Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), Chartered Trade Mark Attorney (UK), BA BSc Genetics, Queen Mary and Westfield English Language and Literature, University College, University of London, MSc of Durham Management of Intellectual Property, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of Particular Expertise: biscuits, confectionery, cosmetics, pharmacy services, motorcycle London, Certificate in Intellectual Property parts, motorcycle accessories, culinary Law, Queen Mary and Westfield College, education, clothing, footwear, financial University of London, Higher Courts services, charity services relating to Litigators Certificate childbirth and parenting. Particular Expertise: pharmaceuticals, agriculture,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Update on Discovery of Patent Prosecution Communications by Jeffrey Thomas, Anne Brody and Pamela Lee
    Portfolio Media. Inc. | 111 West 19th Street, 5th Floor | New York, NY 10011 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | [email protected] Update On Discovery Of Patent Prosecution Communications By Jeffrey Thomas, Anne Brody and Pamela Lee Law360, New York (June 20, 2017, 5:19 PM EDT) -- In general, communications between an attorney and his client relating to the filing and prosecution of a patent application are privileged. Last year, the Federal Circuit found that such communications between a patent agent and his client are also privileged.[1] But under the joint attorney-client privilege or the common interest doctrine, communications between attorneys and two or more clients may not be privileged in a later dispute between these clients. This article discusses the challenges that courts and companies continue to face in determining whether a party can access these patent prosecution communications in disputes: (1) between two joint owners; (2) between an employer-owner and an employee- inventor; and (3) with respect to a patent agent, in other Circuits and state courts. Jeffrey Thomas Do Joint Owners Share a Joint Attorney-Client Privilege During Patent Prosecution? When a dispute arises between two joint owners, one owner may seek to access the other owner’s communications with the patent attorney relating to the patent prosecution process. In that case, a court would look at a few factors to decide. One factor would be whether the patent prosecution process was handled by only one attorney (e.g., an in-house attorney), or by two attorneys separately representing the two owners.
    [Show full text]
  • Attorney-Client Privilege and the Patent Prosecution Process in the Post-Spalding World
    Washington University Law Review Volume 81 Issue 1 2003 Attorney-Client Privilege and the Patent Prosecution Process in the Post-Spalding World Jonathan G. Musch Washington University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Evidence Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation Jonathan G. Musch, Attorney-Client Privilege and the Patent Prosecution Process in the Post-Spalding World, 81 WASH. U. L. Q. 175 (2003). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol81/iss1/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE AND THE PATENT PROSECUTION PROCESS IN THE POST- SPALDING WORLD I. INTRODUCTION One of the oldest traditions of the Anglo-American judicial system is the concept of attorney-client privilege.1 This privilege and its much younger sibling, the work-product doctrine,2 limit the discoverability of private communications between attorney and client.3 Private communications4 between a patent attorney and a client, however, have not always enjoyed this protection.5 Due to a misconception of the role of a patent attorney within the patent prosecution process, courts denied attorney-client privilege first to all patent prosecution documents, and later to documents containing technical information. This effectively denied the privilege to most documents generated during a prosecution.6 More recently, courts afforded certain documents containing technical information protection, but under a patchwork of different standards.7 Frequently, a disagreement existed between different district courts within a circuit,8 as well as among different circuits.9 The exponential technology 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Can I Challenge My Competitor's Patent?
    Check out Derek Fahey's new firm's website! CLICK HERE Can I Challenge My Competitor’s Patent? Yes, you can challenge a patent or patent publication. Before challenging a patent or patent publication, an analysis should be conducted by a registered patent attorney to determine if challenging a patent or patent publication is necessary, and to evaluate the legal grounds for challenging the patent or patent publication. As a registered patent attorney, I evaluate patents and patent applications to determine the risk of developing competing goods. Below are three important questions that must be answered by a registered patent attorney to evaluate the risk of competing against a patented good. 1. Does a particular good infringe on a patent? Typically, a registered patent attorney will conduct a “freedom to operate” opinion to determine if a business owner can commercialize a particular good without infringing on another’s patent. First, a patent attorney will determine if the patent is enforceable. Next, a patent attorney will perform an infringement analysis to determine if a particular good infringes on any of a patent’s claims. To perform an infringement analysis of a patent and a possibly infringing product, first, the patent’s scope must be analyzed. Second, the patent’s claim terms must be interrupted using the specification, prosecution history and extrinsic evidence to understand and construe the meaning of the claim terms. After the claim terms have been construed, then the elements of a particular good must be analyzed to determine if the particular good practices each and every claim element taught by a patent’s claim.
    [Show full text]
  • The Basics of Patents
    Patent Webinar Series The Basics of Patents March 25, 2021 Meet The Speakers Indranil Sarkar Sushil Iyer Principal Principal fr.com | 2 Overview • Topics – What is a patent? – How to get one? – Some practice tips • Housekeeping – CLE – Questions – Materials • http://www.fr.com/webinars fr.com | 3 Agenda • Background • Patent FAQs • Types of US Patent Applications • Anatomy of a Patent Application • Claims • Requirements for Patentability in US • Prosecution in the US fr.com | 4 Background Introduction The Congress shall have power . to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 8 fr.com | 6 What is Intellectual Property? • Intellectual Property (IP) refers to creations of the mind: inventions; literary and artistic works; and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce. • Patents – protect inventions. • Copyrights – protect written or recorded expressive content. • Trademarks – protect words, symbols, logos, designs, and slogans that identify & distinguish products or services. • Trade Secrets – protect confidential business information. fr.com | 7 What is a Patent? • A grant from the government of the right to prevent others from making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing the invention(s) claimed in the patent. • Personal property – can be bought, sold, licensed, bequeathed, mortgaged, assigned. • Limited Term – 20 years for utility and plant patents; 14 years for design patents. • Territorial – must obtain patent in every country where protection is desired. • United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) – tasked with examining US patent applications and granting US patents.
    [Show full text]
  • Approaches to Patenting Alloys Before the Russian and the Eurasian Patent Offices
    The GLOBAL REACH, LOCAL KNOWLEDGE www.patentlawyermagazine.com January / February 2021 Approaches to patenting alloys before the Russian and the Eurasian patent offices DLE ID EA M S T Law firm RANKINGS A N D A A F R I C Anatoly Nistuk and Mikhail Samsonov, of Gorodissky & Partners, examine the patenting of alloys through history and give an evaluation of both the RUPTO and the EAPO approach to patenting. Pharmaceutical Ben Hoopes, HP Women patent Page 20 in IP litigation Leadership Page 15 Page 35 S TURING FEA LAWYER THE LIFE SCIENCEPG 45 IPC Renew - Preparing for Launch 2 - 240x340.pdf 3 23/06/2019 12:07:44 EDITOR’S WELCOME The AL KNOWLEDGE GLOBALGLOBAL REACH,REACH, LOCALLOC KNOWLEDGE January / February 2021 www.patentlawyermagazine.com Approaches to patenting alloys before the Russian and the Eurasian patent offices Editor’s LE DD EA I S M T Law firm RANKINGS A N D A A F R I C welcome Anatoly Nistuk and Mikhail Samsonov, of Gorodissky & Partners, examine the patenting of alloys through history and give an evaluation of both the RUPTO and the EAPO approach to patenting. Ben Hoopes, HP Women in IP Pharmaceutical Page 20 Leadership patent Page 35 hat features should define the patentability of a solution? litigation Page 15 A question Gorodissky & Partners experts examine in FEATURING LAWYER THE LIFE SCIENCESPG 45 23/02/2021 11:56 relation to alloys in our cover story this issue, with close dd 1 W examination of the treatment of alloys through time and what is THE PATENT LAWYER needed to successfully patent an alloy at both the RUPTO and EAPO.
    [Show full text]
  • AURIL Handbook of Intellectual Property Management
    AURIL Handbook of Intellectual Property Management Index 1 of 2 1. INTRODUCTION Includes; Introduction to Handbook; Role of AURIL. 2. IP Policy & Role of Commercialisation Departments Includes; Key elements of I.P. Policy; Role of Commercialisation Department; Sample procedure. 3. Establishing Awareness of IP Includes; Introduction to THEROS; I.P. Presentation Slides; Key information on Patents, Trade Marks; Design, Copyright & Confidential Information. 4. Identification and Tracking of IP Includes; Recordkeeping procedures; Guidelines for the use of Laboratory Notebooks; Sample Technical Disclosure Form. 5. Evaluation of IP Includes; Sample Evaluation Form. 6. Protection of IP Includes; Detailed Information on Patents, Designs, Trade Marks. 7. Marketing of IP Includes; Use of Patent Information. 8. Commercial Arrangements & Disputes Includes; Purchase, Sale & Review Checklist. AURIL Handbook of Intellectual Property Management Index 2 of 2 9. Sample Agreements Includes; Licensing Agreement Checklist. 10. Spin Out Companies Includes; Contact Details for UNICO. 11. IP Management and Review Includes; Sample Management Information Schedule; Patent Summary Questionaire; Sample Internal Report Format. 12. Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights Includes; Copyright Contracts of Employment 13. Universities and the Internet Includes; Internet Policy 14. THEROS Intellectual Property Guidelines Includes; Sample Copy. 15. .............................................................. Please note: This folder is intended to give general information only and is not intended as a source of legal advice applying to specific circumstances. AURIL Handbook of Intellectual Property Management Introduction to Handbook Ref: 1 An important quality of AURIL is that it provides the opportunity for Commercialisation Managers, Industrial Liaison Officers and other research management staff to gain from the experience and expertise of other individuals and organisations in the academic environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Property Protection in the Middle East James Brown
    Intellectual Property Protection in the Middle East James Brown February 2014 © Murgitroyd & Company 20132014 Overview - IP Protection in the Middle East © Technology protection - Patents © GCC Route vs. National Patent Office Route © Brand protection – Trade Marks © Industrial Design protection © Software protection - Copyright © GCC Filing trends © Saudi Aramco Case study © Summary © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents – Route 1 – GCC © How to protect tools, processes, inventions © Route 1 - Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) : File a single GCC patent application parallel to International PCT application at 12 month stage from filing priority application © Consider filing Iraqi patent application (also at 12 month stage) © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents – Route 1 – GCC © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents - Route 1- GCC © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents – Route 2 – International PCT © How to protect technology - tools, processes, inventions © Route 2 - International PCT : File individual applications at each of the national patent offices following International PCT route (National phase) at 30 month stage – Not possible for Iraq. © Consider filing Iraqi patent application (at 12 month stage) © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents – Route 2 – International PCT © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Patents - Summary Absolute novelty: all material made available to the public anywhere in the world forms part of the state of the art © Murgitroyd & Company 2014 Brand protection – Trade Marks Time frame for completing Country Service mark registrable?
    [Show full text]
  • C O M P a N Y P R O F I L E
    EU SUPPLEMENTARY PROTECTION CERTIFICATES - MARCH 2019 AN EXCEPTION TO SPC PROTECTION FOR MEDICINES Support to generic pharmaceutical producers provided by the EU The European Union is adopting new rules that introduce an exception to Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) protection for medicines, allowing EU-based manufacturers of generic and biosimilar pharmaceuticals to manufacture for export to non-EU countries during the term of the Supplementary Protection Certificate. Under existing EU rules, a medicine protected by an SPC has intellectual property rights that effectively extend patent protection beyond the normal 20-year term of the patent, up to an additional five years. The proposed exceptions will allow under certain circumstances, the export to non-EU countries of generics or biosimilars during the last six months of an SPC, but only when those generics or biosimilars are produced exclusively for export to countries where there is no protection of the originator’s drug. The new exceptions will also include an exception for stockpiling purposes during the last six months of the SPC validity before the SPC expires. This important development follows a long debate between the innovative pharmaceutical industry and generic/biosimilar manufacturers on the impact of intellectual property on access, medicines prices and jobs in the EU. These new EU Rules have to be submitted for formal adoption to the European Parliament and the Council. The EU is considering that the regulation will affect only SPCs that are applied for on or after the date of entry into force of the regulation, or applied for but only come into force after a set future date.
    [Show full text]
  • What Makes a Good Patent Attorney?
    ➤ IPINDEPTH by Michael Gzybowski | Counsel, Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione What Makes a Good Patent Attorney? atent attorneys have unique educational backgrounds relative to attorneys in other legal specialty areas. For example, many patent attorneys have advanced sci- ence or engineering degrees. Those with engineering Pdegrees are engrained with an engineering problem-solving approach that focuses on analyzing known and unknown information, and finding very specific solutions. On the other hand, patent attorneys have legal backgrounds and are trained to logically and convincingly justify a predeter- mined position or outcome. The combination of these some- what contrary backgrounds sets patent attorneys apart from other types of attorneys and allows them to work closely and effectively with inventors. A good patent attorney must have strong technical, legal and communication skills. They must also understand that their job is not limited to obtaining patent protection for clients, but also involves leading or guiding clients through the patenting pro- cess and, ultimately, advancing a client’s business. delaying the application for patent protection while promoting Communication is Key or using their inventions and thereby extending the time period After gaining experience and confidence, a patent attorney can of exploiting their inventions. Being aware of this principle also become familiar with aspects of the patenting process that cli- leads to an understanding that patent applications have to pro- ents may find confusing or daunting. Being able to stand in a vide a full enabling disclosure of inventions (including the best client’s shoes and understand and explain what might be unfa- mode of practicing the inventions) so that, after the expiration miliar is an important characteristic of a good patent attorney.
    [Show full text]
  • Kromek Group
    Security Medical Nuclear Screening Imaging Detection Kromek Group UK Headquarters Kromek Limited NETPark Thomas Wright Way Sedgefield County Durham Kromek Group PLC TS21 3FD UK Placing and Admission to trading on AIM T: +44 (0) 1740 626060 F: +44 (0) 1740 626061 E: [email protected] W: www.kromek.com UK and European Operations US Operations Neutron R&D Centre Kromek Germany Ltd NOVA R&D Inc. eV Products Inc. Huddersfield UK California USA Pennsylvania USA THIS DOCUMENT IS IMPORTANT AND REQUIRES YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION. If you are in any doubt about the contents of this document you should consult a person authorised under the FSMA who specialises in advising on the acquisition of shares and other securities. This document, which comprises an AIM admission document, has been drawn up in accordance with the AIM Rules and does not constitute a prospectus under the Prospectus Rules published by the FCA and has not been approved by or filed with the FCA. This document has not been approved by or filed with the FSC. The definitions used in this document are at pages 6 to 8. The Company, whose registered office appears on page 5, and the Directors, whose names appear on page 5, accept responsibility, individually and collectively, for the information contained in this document. To the best of the knowledge and belief of the Company and the Directors (each of whom have taken all reasonable care to ensure that such is the case), the information contained in this document is in accordance with the facts and does not omit anything likely to affect the import of such information.
    [Show full text]
  • C O M P a N Y P R O F I L E
    BREXIT AND IP – UPDATE 21 JAN 2019 BREXIT AND IP – UPDATE 21 JAN 2019 Brexit – Patent Implications Although it may be obvious to those in the know, the UK’s exit from the EU will not affect the current European patent system, which is governed by the European Patent Convention rather than the EU. As such, whatever the outcome of Brexit, UK individuals and businesses will continue to be able to apply to the European Patent Office for patent protection and European patents will continue to apply to the UK. Existing European patents that have been pursued in the UK will also be unaffected. Moreover, Murgitroyd’s European patent attorneys, wherever they are based, will moreover continue to be able to represent applicants before the EPO. You may ask what effect Brexit might have on the Unified Patent Court (UPC), which as you may know is intended to be a court having exclusive competence in respect of European patents and European patents with unitary effect. In this respect, the UK ratified the Unified Patent Court Agreement on 26 April 2018 and it is our understanding is that the UK intends to stay in the Unified Patent Court and unitary patent system even if the UK leaves the EU. As regards the granting of Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for certain patents relating to medicinal or plant protection products, while the UK remains a full member of the EU, businesses can continue to apply for and be granted SPCs using the current SPC system. Our understanding is that once the UK leaves the EU, UK businesses will still be able to apply for SPCs in all remaining EU Member States under the existing system.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of the Utility Model Patent Systems in Europe and China
    Creating a “model” utility model patent system A comparative analysis of the utility model patent systems in Europe and China WWW. IPKEY.ORG Creating a “model” utility model patent system: A comparative analysis of the utility model patent systems in Europe and China Dan Prud’homme December 2014 Abstract: Although it is difficult to create an optimal “model” of the exact types of every aspect of every country’s utility model patent system, this study illustrates that it is possible to create a useful legal, policy, and institutional framework based upon an understanding of the statutory, procedural, and institutional composition of utility model systems in Austria, China, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, and Italy; reasons behind the composition, including any revisions to, these systems; and usage of the systems. It also briefly discusses relevant experiences of Belgium and the Netherlands. Keywords: utility model patent systems, comparative analysis, Europe, China, substantive law, procedural law, institutions, patent quality, innovation ABOUT THIS STUDY, AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study is part of an ongoing activity on utility model patent (hereafter abbreviated as “utility model”) systems under the “IP Key” Project (short for “Intellectual Property: A Key to Sustainable Competiveness”) – a three-year project with multiple activities every year, running from 2013-2016. The project is funded by the European Commission and the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM), and implemented by OHIM with support from the European Patent Office (EPO). It serves as the vehicle for implementing the Administration Agreement on the New EU-China Cooperation on Intellectual Property signed in July 2013 between the European Union and the Government of the People’s Republic of China.
    [Show full text]