Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> IPKat
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: IPKatEP Divisional Applications - the new 2 year rule
By Johanna Gibson, David Pearce, Jeremy Phillips and Ilanah Simon.
1) The applicant may file a divisional application relating to any pending earlier European patent application, provided that:
(a) the divisional application is filed before the expiry of a time limit of 24 months from the Examining Division's first communication in respect of the earliest application for which a communication has been issued, or
(b) the divisional application is filed before the expiry of a time limit of 24 months from a communication in which the Examining Division has objected that the earlier application does not meet the requirements of Article 82 EPC.
It looks like the IPKat's earlier suspicions about the proposed amendments have been confirmed, and the EPO will be holding to their promise of preventing 'abusive' divisional applications from being filed in future. The IPKat is, however, not certain about how the new Rule will work in practice. Will applicants be prevented from filing a divisional to cover embodiments no longer covered as a result of a limiting amendment, if 2 years have passed since the first communication under Article 94(3)? Will it be necessary to provoke an objection under Article 82 by submitting multiple independent claims so that a divisional application can be filed? What would happen if an objection under Article 82 were to be deliberately provoked; will this set the clock running again? Will there be a rush of divisional applications filed within 6 months of the rule coming into force? We shall presumably find out all this, and more, in due course...
Full post as published by IPKat on March 26, 2009 (boomark / email).
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
Federal Government
Florida residents sue claiming extraordinary delays in judging citizenship applications.
82 Year Old
Awarded $6 Million in SJS Lawsuit
Chicago Golf Course
101 Year Old Owner Must Get $25 Million for Property
$3.78 Million Dilantin Settlement Following Death of 9-Year-Old Girl
$3.78 Million Dilantin Settlement Following Death of 9-Year-Old Girl>
Fatal Drug Bust
City of Louisville awards family a $250,000 wrongful death settlement after a police officer shot a 19-year-old boy.
Child Abuse Settlement
The mother of 6-year-old Brandon Ford has accepted a $1.5 million settlement in a lawsuit that claimed the boy was severely brain damaged while in foster care...

USPTO Publishes Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of Markush Limitation Proposal
More Statistics From the 2007-08 Annual Report of the Tennessee Judiciary
John LeGuyader on restriction practice
Restricted-Out Claims Not Eligible for Priority in Later CIP Application
USPTO Requires Written Description in Applications for Trademarks Containing Non-Standard Characters








