EPO Boards of Appeal chief: revised rules will increase workload

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

EPO Boards of Appeal chief: revised rules will increase workload

Carl Josefsson

In an exclusive interview with Managing IP, Carl Josefsson discusses the revised rules of procedure and addresses independence concerns

The president of the EPO’s Boards of Appeal says he is not certain whether the boards’ revised rules of procedure will result in a “front-loading of requests” but has insisted that they should make proceedings more predictable.

Speaking to Managing IP, Carl Josefsson says the revised rules will reduce a party’s options to amend its case as appeal proceedings progress and make it more difficult to withhold submissions for tactical reasons.

However, he confirms the views of some regular users of the system that there will be an increased workload for first instance departments.

“Whether these [the rules] will, in the end, really lead to a ‘precautionary front-loading’ of numerous different lines of argument remains to be seen. After all, procedural economy is in the interests of the parties too,” Josefsson says.

“What can be expected is that to some extent party submissions at first instance will become more comprehensive. It will mainly be up to the departments of first instance to manage the additional workload that this brings.”

Josefsson was reacting to claims from patent attorneys who regularly appear at the EPO and the BoA who told Managing IP that the tightening up of amendments at the appeal stage could result in a precautionary front-loading of requests, amendments and supporting evidence into first instance proceedings.

The revised rules were published at the end of June and will come into effect in January next year. 

In an extensive interview Josefsson also discusses:

·       Further details about the revised rules and their practical impact;

·       The backlog at the BoA and how it is being managed; and

·       Whether the BoA’s independence is improving under the EPO’s new management.

The full interview will be published on Managing IP shortly.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Simona Lavagnini discusses the Greek classics, Rudyard Kipling's 'If', and how she dreams of beautiful words
Herbert Smith Freehills and Kramer Levin’s merger won’t be the last transatlantic tie-up if recent history is anything to go by
Betty Chen reveals litigation opportunities and provides an update on plans to double the firm's headcount in San Francisco
David Parrish expects AI to be among the major talking points for a newly formed committee aimed at protecting the interests of London-based IP practitioners, firms, and their clients
The court, which revealed that the parties had settled their dispute, also upheld findings of infringement
Wu Xiaoping of Wanhuida Intellectual Property says the methodology often applied in assessing inventiveness in pharmaceutical patent litigation cases is set to be used in re-examination and invalidation proceedings after the CNIPA makes an invalidation decision a quasi-precedent
Exclusive data and in-house analysis show that law firms should work smarter, not harder, to ensure their communication has greater impact on clients
The tie-up, which will create a firm with a combined revenue of around $2bn, will add around 10 US-based partners to Herbert Smith Freehills’s IP offering
The High Court’s decision in WaterRower v Liking could have signalled the start of a new approach to determining whether designs can benefit from copyright protection
Maohua Wang, head of the IP group at King & Wood Mallesons in China, explains how the firm’s Eversheds deal affected the IP team and how his team meets clients’ litigation needs
Gift this article