tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post8471892658279622436..comments2024-03-25T10:31:40.979+00:00Comments on Tufty the Cat: Nespresso European Patent RevokedTufty the Cathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803006996232662500noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-34277092221006098622013-10-16T13:48:52.978+00:002013-10-16T13:48:52.978+00:00Thank you!Thank you!Tufty the Cathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09803006996232662500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-87279660463603479562013-10-15T22:38:48.378+00:002013-10-15T22:38:48.378+00:00Very nice job!Very nice job!Myshkinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-31939075493322839682013-10-15T09:33:54.691+00:002013-10-15T09:33:54.691+00:00Thanks for the prompt. My latest post sets out the...Thanks for the prompt. My latest post sets out the opposing view. I hope I have not made too many mistakes in my translation.Tufty the Cathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09803006996232662500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-61437251675231206192013-10-14T00:36:56.842+00:002013-10-14T00:36:56.842+00:00Unfortunately I do not know if I'll ever get a...Unfortunately I do not know if I'll ever get around to writing the (non-)promised guest blog with my thoughts on T 1222/11 and the relevance of the Memorandum, but I noticed that one of the opponents already did an excellent job (but in French).<br /><br />See section 2 of the 12-page letter of 09.09.2013 in <a href="https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP09007962&lng=en&tab=doclist" rel="nofollow">the electronic file</a>.Myshkinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-4949549679029487422013-10-13T11:55:45.352+00:002013-10-13T11:55:45.352+00:00That would explain it. Added matter is usually the...That would explain it. Added matter is usually the first thing to be tackled. If the patent failed at that stage it would have been game over.Tufty the Cathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09803006996232662500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-78673118026818571832013-10-13T08:10:58.649+00:002013-10-13T08:10:58.649+00:00The patent was revoked due to extension of subject...The patent was revoked due to extension of subject matter. A representative of one of the opponents. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4665971923360779136.post-26095664895961923142013-10-12T20:03:40.151+00:002013-10-12T20:03:40.151+00:00I hope the decision goes into some detail on the p...I hope the decision goes into some detail on the priority point - unless there's some killer prior art that just anticipates everything, in which case it's a fair cop.<br /><br />However, it's a little disappointing, first because I think there is a clear divergence in the application of G2/98. I wonder if Nestec will file a petition for review by the EBA, but unless there's been a violation of their right to be heard then I don't think that will happen.<br /><br />It's interesting to note looking back over all the case reports I've amassed that Kitchin J did actually quote all of the discussion on "AND" and "OR" claims in view of Memo C in G2/98. With the utmost respect, I do wonder if Arnold J read the Memo, particularly, as has been mentioned a number of times on this blog and elsewhere, the pipes example, because that is directly analogous to the housing and its relation to the first part and its second part.<br /><br />Clearly this issue is a sticking point for Judges here in England and Wales, for example with the HTC case (high-level programming languages being Java, or any language except Java, was it?).<br /><br />So it's secondly disappointing because I would like to see what the Court of Appeal have to say on the matter. I assume that as the patent has been revoked, the case dies.Joe Muddimannoreply@blogger.com