You appear to be using an older version of Internet Explorer. We suggest you upgrade your browser for the best viewing experience. Upgrade to a Modern Browser
21 January 2022
Nicolas Savary, a qualified French and European Trade Mark Attorney, has joined J A Kemp’s Paris office. Nicolas joins J A Kemp after having practised intellectual property law for almost fifteen years in several firms in Luxembourg and France and most recently Gevers in Paris. Nicolas serves as a senior counsel for the firm’s French operation and works across trade marks, designs, copyright and domain names. The J A Kemp Trade Marks and Designs Group has qualified attorneys in its London, Paris, Oxford and Cambridge offices. Nicolas’s recruitment follows continued growth in the firm’s work before the European Union Intellectual Property Office...
20 January 2022
As reported previously, the UK government has been consulting on the future regime for exhaustion of intellectual property rights following the UK’s departure from the EU. In an update posted on 18 January 2022, it was indicated that the government has completed an initial analysis of the responses to the consultation, but found that there is not enough data to understand the economic impact of any of the potential alternatives to the current post-Brexit system (the so-called “UK+ regime”). Given the potential of any change to affect a wider variety of business sectors and end consumers, the government has decided to...
20 January 2022
The General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union yesterday declared that the Provisional Application Period (PAP) of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has started, following deposit by Austria of its instrument of ratification. The Unified Patent Court will oversee the Unitary Patent (UP) which is intended to be a single patent right having effect in the territories of participating EU members and European patents granted in participating countries. The beginning of the PAP means that the UPC Preparatory Committee can begin work to establish the Court, which is expected to take at least eight months. When the member countries...
5 January 2022
The EPO has launched a user consultation into the desirability of introducing a “grace period” into the European patent system. At present, the European Patent Convention (EPC) specifies in Article 54(2) that the state of the art for the purposes of assessing novelty shall 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”. Although Article 55 EPC provides for such disclosures to be “non-prejudicial” under very limited circumstances, namely where there has been an “evident abuse” or display...
30 December 2021
Background As applicants and representatives will be well-aware, the EPO has, for a very long time, required that the description of a patent application be amended prior to grant to ensure that it “conforms” to the allowed claims. Traditionally such amendments took the form of amending the “summary of the invention” or similar introductory portion of the application to recite the wording of the allowed independent claims, or to make explicit reference to those claims. Such amendments, whilst occasionally tedious, became an accepted part of practice at the EPO and had no noticeable impact on the scope of protection. However, in the...
22 December 2021
Yesterday, 21 December 2021, the EPO’s Legal Board of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal in respect of the two European patent applications that attempted to name a computer system as the sole inventor. This is the latest decision in the long-running and widespread attempts by Dr Stephen Thaler and his legal team to gain recognition for machines as inventors within the patent system. The full reasons for the Board’s decision will be published later, but a brief Press Communiqué has been issued by the EPO. It appears that the Board has substantively agreed with the decisions of the EPO’s Receiving Section...
20 December 2021
The European Patent Office (EPO) has been participating in WIPO’s Digital Access Service (DAS) for the exchange of certified copies of priority documents since 2018 (see our earlier report here). Initially, the EPO’s participation in DAS did not affect pre-existing arrangements through which the EPO automatically obtained copies of Japanese, Chinese, Korean and US priority applications even when a DAS code was not provided. However, the EPO announced in March 2020 that its arrangement with the Japanese patent office would cease on 31 December 2021 and that the EPO would no longer automatically obtain copies of Japanese priority documents from 1...
20 December 2021
The European Patent Office (EPO) has announced plans to relocate the Boards of Appeal from Haar (a suburb of Munich) back to the city centre area of Munich, where the rest of the EPO is based. Before the move goes ahead, a detailed proposal will need to be approved by the EPO member states at the next Administrative Council in March 2022. The EPO currently plans for the relocation to take place in 2025/2026. The plans reverse the move made in 2017 when the Boards of Appeal relocated from the centre of Munich to Haar. The move was not hugely popular at...
9 December 2021
The UK IPO has issued an open consultation with a call for views in relation to standard essential patents. The consultation includes a wide range of questions relating to the relationship between standard essential patents and innovation, competition and market functioning, transparency, licensing and litigation. The closing date for responding to the consultation is 1 March 2022. A standard essential patent (SEP) is a patent covering technology that is required (i.e. is essential) to implement a technical standard (such as 2G, 3G and 4G in the telecommunications industry). Conforming to a technical standard may allow devices from different manufacturers to operate together...
6 December 2021
The Finnish Market Court has referred a new question to the CJEU, asking whether a second SPC to a combination of active ingredients can be granted to the holder of a first SPC to one of the active ingredients, when both SPCs are based on the same basic patent. The specific wording of the referred question is not yet clear, but we understand that it relates to the interpretation of Article 3(c) of the SPC Regulation. Article 3(c) requires that: “A[n SPC] shall be granted if … the product has not already been the subject of a certificate” The case at issue...
2 December 2021
The EU “unitary patent” took a step closer to being established on 2 December when the upper House of the Austrian parliament (the Federal Council) approved the Protocol for Provisional Application (PPA) of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA). The Unitary Patent (UP) is intended to be a single patent right having effect in the territory of participating EU members, overseen by the Unified Patent Court (UPC). Austria is now in a position to become the 13th state to deposit its instrument of ratification of the PPA, perhaps in early 2022, if not before the end of 2021. As reported...
24 November 2021
The EPO has announced that it is further extending the use of videoconference for opposition division oral proceedings until 31 May 2022. The current measures, whereby all opposition division oral proceedings take place by videoconference, were due to expire on 31 January 2022. We understand that this announcement means that no opposition division oral proceedings will take place in-person until after 31 May 2022. These measures do not apply to the Boards of Appeal, who resumed in-person oral proceedings in Munich to a limited extent on 18 May 2020 and are currently conducting both in-person oral proceedings and videoconference oral proceedings, on...
We set great store by what our clients say about us. These comments are all from leading legal and IP directories or provided directly by our clients.
J A Kemp was awarded "Best UK Patent Prosecution Firm" at the Managing Intellectual Property Awards 2020.
"J A Kemp demonstrates excellent technical prowess matched by legal sophistication. Unlike many other European patent attorneys, I view the partners there as collaborators rather than as service providers."
"Unified team culture, deep concentration of technical expertise and ability to effortlessly switch to another gear in times of extreme need.”
“J A Kemp is second to none in my experience.”
"I don’t work with anyone as good. I recommend J A Kemp because it’s good for my clients."
"If I want an opinion I’ll go with J A Kemp."
"They identify with our priorities, are immediately responsive and generate confidence in their technical ability."
“A very sharp firm, nimble on its feet and able to really deliver, J A Kemp is timely, professional and excellent value for money.”
"Clients are most impressed with the work of J A Kemp. The team are highly responsive, intensely hard-working, and uniformly thoughtful in their handling of prosecution and post-prosecution matters (e.g. oppositions). They are proactive and induce a high degree of confidence."
"J A Kemp offers some of the finest patent services in Europe, delivers cast-iron protection for inventions of all types and conducts sterling opposition and appeal work at the EPO."
"I am really impressed with them. The team is very proactive, strategic and thinks about the best way to move forward."
"J A Kemp’s team of trade mark attorneys are true experts and above all extremely commercial."
"The whole team is extremely knowledgeable of the underlying subject matter and also of EU patent practice - they do a valuable analysis of the specifications to optimise the patent’s strength."
"J A Kemp gives good, clear, commercial recommendations."
"J A Kemp is my preferred firm because the level of service and understanding of the client’s technology is great."
J A Kemp is "a go-to for UK and European trademark matters – its expert practitioners provide practical advice quickly and for a fair price, and impress at every turn".
"J A Kemp has a very 'can do' attitude for jobs which are complex."
"These are some of the most detailed and thorough instructions that I have ever seen. They evidence a keen understanding of US practice."
"J A Kemp is extremely knowledgeable and does a fantastic job."
"I cannot thank you enough for your expert advice and careful strategic thinking in this matter."
"We want the best protection available and I give J A Kemp the highest marks possible."