In-house lawyers still unsure how upcoming EU patent changes will impact on IP litigation
Many in-house legal teams are still unclear about how they will be affected by next year's overhaul of the European patents system. Research from Legal Week Intelligence in association with Powell Gilbert found that more than one in three lawyers involved in commissioning or carrying out IP work don't know enough about the introduction of the European Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court to say how it will change IP litigation. The new structure, which is due to be introduced in spring 2014, will involve the creation of unitary European patents, enforceable across all 28 EU states. The proposed Unified Patent Court would hear infringement cases from across all member states.
October 24, 2013 at 07:03 PM
2 minute read
Many in-house legal teams are still unclear about how they will be affected by next year's overhaul of the European patents system.
Research from Legal Week Intelligence in association with Powell Gilbert found that more than one in three lawyers involved in commissioning or carrying out IP work don't know enough about the introduction of the European Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court to say how it will change IP litigation.
The new structure, which is due to be introduced in spring 2014, will involve the creation of unitary European patents, enforceable across all 28 EU states. The proposed Unified Patent Court would hear infringement cases from across all member states.
More than half of respondents to the survey, three quarters of whom work in-house and a quarter in private practice, said they didn't know if the changes would have an impact on the cost of obtaining patents. Some 19% thought costs would increase, with 16% saying they would be lower.
"The aim of the new system is to deliver a more effective and cheaper patent, and one that can be litigated across Europe," said Penny Gilbert, a partner at Powell Gilbert (pictured). "But one of the big unknowns now is what the costs of the system will be."
Most of those surveyed welcomed the new system, with 58% rating it as a 'good idea' and only 3% saying it was a 'bad idea'. However, of these positive responses, more than half said they were not sure the system would work well in practice.
Among the other findings from the wide-ranging survey was that IP lawyers view China as causing the most concern when it came to the protection of IP rights, with 58% naming the country as providing the biggest challenge. Europe trailed in second with 17%, while 12% said India provided the greatest challenge.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTo Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readWhat About the Old Partners Who Have No Interest in AI?
Netflix Offices Raided by Authorities in Paris and Amsterdam
The EU Top 30, 2024: Ranking the Largest Law Firms in the European Union by Headcount
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250