by Daniel X. Thomas
Dear Readers of the blog,
I thank you for your assiduity in following my blog.
The holiday break is in front of us, and I wish you, and all your beloved ones, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
May all your wishes be fulfilled, and your dreams become true,
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 1 793 917 B1 relates to a well-known device for carbonating water in which the bottle is received in a container=flask whereby the container and the filling head are movable in relation to each other between an insertion position (I) and a carbonating position (C).
Brief outline of the case
The patent in suit has been granted with effect for Austria,
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 1 856 792 B2 relates to a method for detecting the position of a rotor.
Brief outline of the case
The OD decided maintenance according to AR13 as claim 1 as granted lacked N over D12=AT 408 591, classified as Y,A in the ESR established by the EPO. The same applied to AR1.
by Daniel X. Thomas
Dear Mr Tillmann,
This post is a reply to the allegations you have made in GRUR Int 2024, 769.
In this article you have criticised Nicolas Binctin (Professor in Poitiers, France) and Craig A. Nard (Professor in Cleveland, USA) for their conclusion that the conditions of entry into force of the UPCA as set out in its Art.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 313 452 B1 relates to the preparation of an injectable cross-linked hydrogel
Brief outline of the case
The opposition was rejected and both opponents appealed.
None of the requests on file, as granted and AR1, were allowable due to lack of IS over D9=WO 2005/085329 as CPA.