Stephen,
I was also surprised to see that Peter wrote that the oppositions were to be
filed with the national patent offices. As you say it is centrally filed
with EPO, provided it is within the 9 month time frame.
With respect to EP702555, both Lilly and Icos filed their opposition on
101298 and 251298 respectively, along with other companies, before the 9
month deadline from 110398, the date of grant. But filing opposition does
not preclude anybody opposing in the national courts of the designated
countries and presumably Lilly/Icos exercised this option.
Swami
(S. narayanaswami)
Pfizer Global Research and development
Sandwich
Kent
CT13 9NJ
e-mail subramaniyan_naraynaswami@sandwich.pfizer.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Adams [mailto:stevea@magister.co.uk]
Sent: 10 November 2000 09:12
To: Peter Steele
Cc: 'simmons.es@pg.com'; piug-l@derwent.tecc.co.uk
Subject: Re: EPO designated states
PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachment has been virus checked by the
PGRD Sandwich Data Centre.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Steele wrote:
> Edlyn - that's helpful, thanks. We too were getting a little bit confused
> about what happened when an where.
>
> Just to make it a little clearer, during the 9-month post-grant opposition
> period, the EPO does little more than receive and collate the oppositions,
> apparently.
Sorry to be pedantic, but I don't think this is quite correct. Any
opposition
filed with the EPO during the 9-month post-grant period IS heard centrally
at
the EPO, in the language of the proceedings (e.g. opposition to a BASF case
published in German will proceed in German). It is only if opposition or
other
actions are started AFTER the 9-month period that the opponent(s) have to
proceed before each national jurisdiction in which the patent is granted.
> They then pass to the national patent offices of the designated
> states. So in the case of EP702555 for example (the sildenafil use case
> that's causing a lot of comment in the press currently) each of the
thirteen
> opponents could have to go court in all 16 of the designated states. Could
> take some time to sort that one out.......
>
As above, this will hinge upon whether opposition was filed centrally or
nationally. I believe that in this case the opposition was not filed within
the
9-month window and hence all the talk in the press about an EP(UK).
EP702555
was granted in March 1998, so if the opponents did not file until early
1999,
they would have had to do it at the GB courts, not in Munich.
-- Stephen Adams Magister Ltd. Crown House, 231 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 4LS, GB Tel: +44 (0)118 929 9515 Fax: +44 (0)118 929 9516 e-mail: stevea@magister.co.ukRegistered in England and Wales. Company No. 3407685 Registered address : Canada House, 272 Field End Road, Eastcote, Ruislip, Middlesex HA4 9NA.
PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any attachment has been virus checked by the PGRD Sandwich Data Centre. ----------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 15:59:05 EDT