1.
United States Patent and Trademark Office
–
The USPTO is unique among federal agencies because it operates solely on fees collected by its users, and not on taxpayer dollars. The USPTO is based in Alexandria, Virginia, after a 2005 move from the Crystal City area of neighboring Arlington, the head of the USPTO is Michelle K. Lee. She took up her new role on January 13,2014, on March 13, she formally took office as Director after being nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U. S. Senate. She formerly served as the Director of the USPTOs Silicon Valley satellite office, the USPTO cooperates with the European Patent Office and the Japan Patent Office as one of the Trilateral Patent Offices. The USPTO mission is to maintain a permanent, interdisciplinary historical record of all U. S. patent applications in order to fulfill objectives outlined in the United States Constitution. The legal basis for the United States patent system is Article 1, Section 8, an additional building in Arlington, Virginia, was opened in 2009. The USPTO was expected by 2014 to open its first ever satellite offices in Detroit, Dallas, Denver, the first satellite office opened in Detroit on July 13,2012. In 2013, due to the sequestration, the satellite office for Silicon Valley. However, renovation and infrastructure updates continued after the sequestration, and the Silicon Valley location is due to open in San Jose City Hall in mid-2015. As of September 30,2009, the end of the U. S. governments fiscal year, of those,6,242 were patent examiners and 388 were trademark examining attorneys, the rest are support staff. They are generally newly graduated scientists and engineers, recruited from universities around the nation. They hold degrees in scientific disciplines, but who do not necessarily hold law degrees. Unlike patent examiners, trademark examiners must be licensed attorneys, all examiners work under a strict, count-based production system. For every application, counts are earned by composing, filing, and mailing a first office action on the merits, the Patent Operations of the office is divided into nine different technology centers that deal with various arts. Prior to 2012, decisions of patent examiners may be appealed to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, the United States Supreme Court may ultimately decide on a patent case. Similarly, decisions of trademark examiners may be appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, with subsequent appeals directed to the Federal Circuit, under the America Invents Act, the BPAI was converted to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board or PTAB. In recent years, the USPTO has seen increasing delays between when a patent application is filed and when it issues, to address its workload challenges, the USPTO has undertaken an aggressive program of hiring and recruitment. The USPTO hired 1,193 new patent examiners in Fiscal Year 2006,1,215 new examiners in fiscal 2007, in 2006, USPTO instituted a new training program for patent examiners called the Patent Training Academy
2.
Law of the United States
–
The United States Code is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law. Federal law and treaties, so long as they are in accordance with the Constitution, preempt conflicting state and territorial laws in the 50 U. S. states, however, the scope of federal preemption is limited because the scope of federal power is not universal. Indeed, states may grant their citizens broader rights than the federal Constitution as long as they do not infringe on any federal constitutional rights. Thus, most U. S. law consists primarily of state law, which can and does vary greatly from one state to the next. At both the federal and state levels, the law of the United States is largely derived from the law system of English law. However, American law has diverged greatly from its English ancestor both in terms of substance and procedure, and has incorporated a number of civil law innovations. In the United States, the law is derived from five sources, constitutional law, statutory law, treaties, administrative regulations, where Congress enacts a statute that conflicts with the Constitution, the Supreme Court may find that law unconstitutional and declare it invalid. Notably, a statute does not disappear automatically merely because it has been found unconstitutional, many federal and state statutes have remained on the books for decades after they were ruled to be unconstitutional. However, under the principle of stare decisis, no sensible lower court will enforce an unconstitutional statute, conversely, any court that refuses to enforce a constitutional statute will risk reversal by the Supreme Court. The United States and most Commonwealth countries are heirs to the common law tradition of English law. Certain practices traditionally allowed under English common law were expressly outlawed by the Constitution, such as bills of attainder, as common law courts, U. S. courts have inherited the principle of stare decisis. The actual substance of English law was received into the United States in several ways. Some reception statutes impose a specific date for reception, such as the date of a colonys founding. Thus, contemporary U. S. Second, a number of important British statutes in effect at the time of the Revolution have been independently reenacted by U. S. states. Two examples that many lawyers will recognize are the Statute of Frauds, such English statutes are still regularly cited in contemporary American cases interpreting their modern American descendants. However, it is important to understand that despite the presence of reception statutes, early on, American courts, even after the Revolution, often did cite contemporary English cases. But citations to English decisions gradually disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the problems of the American people. The number of published volumes of American reports soared from eighteen in 1810 to over 8,000 by 1910
3.
Patent
–
A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a sovereign state to an inventor or assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for detailed public disclosure of an invention. An invention is a solution to a technological problem and is a product or a process. Patents are a form of intellectual property, the procedure for granting patents, requirements placed on the patentee, and the extent of the exclusive rights vary widely between countries according to national laws and international agreements. Typically, however, a patent application must include one or more claims that define the invention. A patent may include many claims, each of which defines a specific property right and these claims must meet relevant patentability requirements, such as novelty, usefulness, and non-obviousness. Nevertheless, there are variations on what is patentable subject matter from country to country, the word patent originates from the Latin patere, which means to lay open. More directly, it is a version of the term letters patent. Similar grants included land patents, which were land grants by early state governments in the USA, and printing patents, a precursor of modern copyright. In modern usage, the term patent usually refers to the granted to anyone who invents any new, useful. The additional qualification utility patent is used to distinguish the primary meaning from these other types of patents. Particular species of patents for inventions include biological patents, business method patents, chemical patents, the period of protection was 10 years. These were mostly in the field of glass making, as Venetians emigrated, they sought similar patent protection in their new homes. This led to the diffusion of patent systems to other countries, by the 16th century, the English Crown would habitually abuse the granting of letters patent for monopolies. After public outcry, King James I of England was forced to revoke all existing monopolies, the Statute became the foundation for later developments in patent law in England and elsewhere. Important developments in patent law emerged during the 18th century through a process of judicial interpretation of the law. During the reign of Queen Anne, patent applications were required to supply a complete specification of the principles of operation of the invention for public access. Influenced by the philosophy of John Locke, the granting of patents began to be viewed as a form of property right. The English legal system became the foundation for patent law in countries with a common law heritage, including the United States, New Zealand, in the Thirteen Colonies, inventors could obtain patents through petition to a given colonys legislature
4.
United States Constitution
–
The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution, originally comprising seven articles, delineates the national frame of government, Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure used by the thirteen States to ratify it. In general, the first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, offer specific protections of individual liberty, the majority of the seventeen later amendments expand individual civil rights protections. Others address issues related to federal authority or modify government processes and procedures, Amendments to the United States Constitution, unlike ones made to many constitutions worldwide, are appended to the document. All four pages of the original U. S, according to the United States Senate, The Constitutions first three words—We the People—affirm that the government of the United States exists to serve its citizens. From September 5,1774 to March 1,1781, the Continental Congress functioned as the government of the United States. The process of selecting the delegates for the First and Second Continental Congresses underscores the revolutionary role of the people of the colonies in establishing a governing body. The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was the first constitution of the United States and it was drafted by the Second Continental Congress from mid-1776 through late-1777, and ratification by all 13 states was completed by early 1781. Under the Articles of Confederation, the governments power was quite limited. The Confederation Congress could make decisions, but lacked enforcement powers, implementation of most decisions, including modifications to the Articles, required unanimous approval of all thirteen state legislatures. The Continental Congress could print money but the currency was worthless, Congress could borrow money, but couldnt pay it back. No state paid all their U. S. taxes, some paid nothing, some few paid an amount equal to interest on the national debt owed to their citizens, but no more. No interest was paid on debt owed foreign governments, by 1786, the United States would default on outstanding debts as their dates came due. Internationally, the Articles of Confederation did little to enhance the United States ability to defend its sovereignty, most of the troops in the 625-man United States Army were deployed facing – but not threatening – British forts on American soil. They had not been paid, some were deserting and others threatening mutiny, spain closed New Orleans to American commerce, U. S. officials protested, but to no effect. Barbary pirates began seizing American ships of commerce, the Treasury had no funds to pay their ransom, if any military crisis required action, the Congress had no credit or taxing power to finance a response. Domestically, the Articles of Confederation was failing to bring unity to the sentiments and interests of the various states
5.
Australian patent law
–
Australian patent law is law governing the granting of a temporary monopoly on the use of an invention, in exchange for the publication and free use of the invention after a certain time. The primary piece of legislation is the Patents Act 1990, Patents are administered by the Commonwealth Government agency IP Australia. Australia is a state of the World Intellectual Property Organization. This makes Australian patent law broadly comparable with patent law in other major countries, Australia has two kinds of patent available, a standard patent with a term of 20 years an innovation patent, with a lower threshold for inventiveness, and a maximum term of 8 years. Innovation patents have an approval process and lower fees. Australia operates a first to file system, like much of the rest of the world, the AusPat Patent database is the official Australian patents database operated by the Australian Intellectual Property Office. AusPat records patents dating back to 1904, in Australia, the system of granting patents in the Australian Colonies is based upon British law, and can be traced back to the English Statute of Monopolies of 1623. Prior to the Colonial states enacting their own legislation in the mid-19th Century and forming their own Patent Offices, when legislatures were established in the Australian Colonies, people could apply for a patent to be granted by the Governor of the colony, by way of a Private Bill. The first of these was South Australian Private Act No.1 of 1848, granted to Andrew John Murray of Adelaide, S. A. for An improved windlass, on 20 June 1848, for a period of 10 years. A further three Private Acts were granted in South Australia, and several were granted in Western Australia, the administration of the States Patents Acts was transferred to the Commonwealth of Australia from 1 June 1904. IP Australia is the Australian Government agency responsible for administering patents, as well as marks, designs. Patent law History of patent law Australian property law National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents 102 CLR252
6.
Business method patent
–
Business method patents are a class of patents which disclose and claim new methods of doing business. This includes new types of e-commerce, insurance, banking and tax compliance etc, business method patents are a relatively new species of patent and there have been several reviews investigating the appropriateness of patenting business methods. Nonetheless, they have become important assets for both independent inventors and major corporations, in general, inventions are eligible for patent protection if they pass the tests of patentability, patentable subject matter, novelty, inventive step or non-obviousness, and industrial applicability. A business method may be defined as a method of operating any aspect of an economic enterprise, on January 7,1791, France passed a patent law that stated that Any new discovery or invention, in all types of industry, is owned by its author. Inventors paid a fee depending upon the term of the patent. 14 out of 48 of the patents were for financial inventions. In June 1792, for example, a patent was issued to inventor F. P. Dousset for a type of tontine in combination with a lottery and these patents raised concerns and were banned and declared invalid in an amendment to the law passed in 1792. In Britain, a patent was issued in 1778 to John Knox for a “lan for assurances on lives of persons from 10 to 80 years of age. ”At this time in British law, patents could only be issued for manufactured objects, not manufacturing processes. Patents have been granted in the United States on methods for doing business since the US patent system was established in 1790, the first financial patent was granted on March 19,1799, to Jacob Perkins of Massachusetts for an invention for Detecting Counterfeit Notes. All details of Mr. Perkins invention, which presumably was a device or process in the art, were lost in the great Patent Office fire of 1836. Its existence is known from other sources. The first financial patent for which any detailed description survives was to a printing method entitled A Mode of Preventing Counterfeiting granted to John Kneass on April 28,1815. The first fifty years of the U. S, another such case was Joseph E. Seagram & Sons v. Marzell,180 F, for many years, the USPTO took the position that methods of doing business were not patentable. Consequently, they took the position that examiners would not have to if a claimed invention was a method of doing business or not. They would determine patentability based on the statutory requirements as any other invention. The subsequent allowance of patents on computer implemented methods for doing business was challenged in the 1998 State Street Bank v. Signature Financial Group, the court affirmed the position of the USPTO and rejected the theory that a method of doing business was excluded subject matter. The court further confirmed this principle with AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, the USPTO continued to require, however, that business method inventions must apply, involve, use or advance the technological arts in order to be patentable
7.
Patent application
–
A patent application is a request pending at a patent office for the grant of a patent for the invention described and claimed by that application. An application consists of a description of the invention, together with official forms, the term patent application is also used to refer to the process of applying for a patent, or to the patent specification itself. This is often a national patent office, but may be a regional body, once the patent specification complies with the laws of the office concerned, a patent may be granted for the invention described and claimed by the specification. The process of negotiating or arguing with a patent office for the grant of a patent, Patent prosecution is distinct from patent litigation which relates to legal proceedings for infringement of a patent after it is granted. As pointed out by Peter Prescott QC, the patent application is ambiguous. It can bear two different meanings, The legal state of affairs that is constituted when a person requests the competent authority to grant him a patent and that request is still outstanding. The first of those – the request for a privilege to which you are entitled if your application be well founded – is an institutional fact. It ceases to exist as soon as your application is withdrawn, is refused, the second of those, the informational content of the document as filed, is a historical fact that never goes away, no matter what the Patent Office does, or anyone else does. The expression application is often employed without being conscious of its ambiguity, the expression is capable of misleading even experienced professionals. The former are known as national applications, and the latter as regional applications, national applications are generally filed at a national patent office, such as the United Kingdom Patent Office, to obtain a patent in the country of that office. A regional patent application is one which may have effect in a range of countries, the European Patent Office is an example of a Regional patent office. The EPO grants patents which can take effect in some or all countries contracting to the European Patent Convention, the cost and complexity of obtaining protection is therefore reduced. The Patent Cooperation Treaty is operated by World Intellectual Property Organization and provides an application process. The PCT system enables an applicant to file a patent application in a single language. The application, called an application, can, at a later date. Steps such as naming inventors and applicants, and filing certified copies of priority documents can also be done centrally, and need not be repeated. The main advantage of proceeding via the PCT route is that the option of obtaining patents in a range of countries is retained. In most countries, if a national application succeeds, damages can be claimed from the date of the international applications publication, Patent offices may define a number of types of applications, each offering different benefits and being useful in different situations
8.
Insurance patent
–
Under some patent laws, patents may be obtained for insurance-related inventions. Historically, patents could only cover the aspects of a new insurance invention. This is still the case in most countries, in the United States, however, recent court decisions have encouraged more inventors to file patent applications on methods of doing business. These patents may be used to get more coverage of improvements in basic insurance processes, such as the methods of calculating premiums, reserves, underwriting. This is causing controversy in the industry as some see it as a positive development. An early example of a patent is U. S. Patent 467,872 Means for Securing Travelers Against Loss by Accident and this patent was issued in 1892. It discloses a means for selling travelers insurance by combining coupons with a newspaper, a more recent example of an insurance patent is EP application 0700009, granted as EP 0700009B Individual evaluation system for motorcar risk. This patent issued by the European Patent Office in 1996 to Salvador Minguijon Perez and it discloses a means for auto insurance risk selection whereby a driver’s mileage and driving behavior are monitored and insurance premiums are charged accordingly. The United Kingdom part of this European patent has been sold to Norwich Union insurance company, historically, only about one or two patents per year issued in the US on inventions specifically related to insurance policies. This changed dramatically, however, with the 1998 State Street Bank Decision, the State Street Bank Decision was a ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that confirmed that there was no “business method exception” under United States patent law. The number of patent applications filed per year after this decision was handed down jumped to about 150, the number of patents issuing per year jumped to about 30. In September 2006, Lincoln National Corporation filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Transamerica Life Insurance Company, Patent 7,089,201, “Method and apparatus for providing retirement income benefits”. This patent covers methods for administering variable annuities, the jury found the patent valid and infringed. The court ordered Transamerica to pay Lincoln $13 million in damages, at a rate of 11 basis points of assets under management, this was considered a reasonable royalty. Some in the industry see the growth in insurance patents as a positive development. They cite that by being able to protect inventions, insurance companies will be inclined to invest in new product development. Some are concerned that the growth in patent claims will be negative and they are concerned that invalid patents will issue and that this will lead to patent trolls inhibiting new product introductions by demanding excessive license fees for these questionable patents
9.
History of patent law
–
The history of patents and patent law is generally considered to have started with the Venetian Statute of 1474. There is some evidence that some form of patent rights was recognized in Ancient Greece, athenaeus, writing in the third century CE, cites Phylarchus in saying that in Sybaris exclusive rights were granted for one year to creators of unique culinary dishes. These letters patent provided the recipient with a monopoly to produce goods or provide particular services. Another early example of such letters patent was a grant by Henry VI in 1449 to John of Utynam, the first Italian patent was awarded by the Republic of Florence in 1421. The Florentine architect Filippo Brunelleschi received a patent for a barge with hoisting gear. The period of protection was 10 years and these were mostly in the field of glass making. As Venetians emigrated, they sought similar patent protection in their new homes and this led to the diffusion of patent systems to other countries. King Henry II of France introduced the concept of publishing the description of an invention in a patent in 1555, the first patent specification was to inventor Abel Foullon for Usaige & Description de lholmetre, Publication was delayed until after the patent expired in 1561. Patents were granted by the monarchy and by institutions like the Maison du Roi. The novelty of the invention was examined by the French Academy of Sciences, digests were published irregularly starting in 1729 with delays of up to 60 years. Examinations were generally done in secret with no requirement to publish a description of the invention, actual use of the invention was deemed adequate disclosure to the public. By the 16th century, the English Crown would habitually grant letters patent for monopolies to favoured persons and this power was used to raise money for the Crown, and was widely abused, as the Crown granted patents in respect of all sorts of common goods. Consequently, the Court began to limit the circumstances in which they could be granted, after public outcry, James I of England was forced to revoke all existing monopolies and declare that they were only to be used for projects of new invention. It also voided all existing monopolies and dispensations with the exception of, the Statute became the foundation for later developments in patent law in England and elsewhere. Important developments in patent law emerged during the 18th century through a process of judicial interpretation of the law. During the reign of Queen Anne, patent applications were required to supply a complete specification of the principles of operation of the invention for public access, patenting medicines was particular popular in the mid-eighteenth century and then declined. This legal system became the foundation for patent law in countries with a common law heritage, including the United States, New Zealand, in the Thirteen Colonies, inventors could obtain patents through petition to a given colony’s legislature. In 1641, Samuel Winslow was granted the first patent in North America by the Massachusetts General Court for a new process for making salt
10.
Software patent
–
According to the European Patent Office, there is no legal or conclusive definition for a software patent. According to the FFII, software patents should not exist under European law, globally the situation is more complex and reflects varying cultural views of invention itself. Most countries place some limits on the patenting of inventions involving software, for example, U. S. patent law excludes abstract ideas, and this has been used to refuse some patents involving software. There is a debate over the extent to which software patents should be granted, a patent is a set of exclusionary rights granted by a state to a patent holder for a limited period of time, usually 20 years. These rights are granted to patent applicants in exchange for their disclosure of the inventions, once a patent is granted in a given country, no person may make, use, sell or import/export the claimed invention in that country without the permission of the patent holder. Permission, where granted, is typically in the form of a license which conditions are set by the patent owner, to obtain a patent, inventors must file patent applications in each and every country in which they want a patent. For example, separate applications must be filed in Japan, China and these different countries and regional offices have different standards for granting patents. This is particularly true of software or computer-implemented inventions, especially where the software is implementing a business method, on 21 May 1962, a British patent application entitled A Computer Arranged for the Automatic Solution of Linear Programming Problems was filed. The invention was concerned with efficient memory management for the simplex algorithm, the patent was granted on August 17,1966 and seems to be one of the first software patents. Substantive law regarding the patentability of software and computer-implemented inventions, in Canada, courts have held that the use of a computer alone neither lends, nor reduces patentability of an invention. However, it is the position of the Canadian Patent Office that where a computer is an element of a patents claims. Article 52 EPC excludes programs for computers from patentability to the extent that a patent application relates to a program as such. Computer-implemented inventions that only solve a problem using a computer, rather than a technical problem, are considered unpatentable as lacking an inventive step. Nevertheless, the fact that an invention is useful in business does not mean it is not patentable if it solves a technical problem. Concerns have been raised that the new Unified Patent Court will be more open to patents generally. In April 2013, the German Parliament adopted a joint motion against the trend of patent offices to grant patents on software programs. Current case law in the UK states that an invention will only be regarded as an if it provides a contribution that is not excluded. A computer program implementing a process is therefore not an invention
11.
Patent Cooperation Treaty
–
The Patent Cooperation Treaty is an international patent law treaty, concluded in 1970. It provides a procedure for filing patent applications to protect inventions in each of its contracting states. A patent application filed under the PCT is called an international application, a single filing of a PCT application is made with a Receiving Office in one language. It then results in a search performed by an International Searching Authority, accompanied by an opinion regarding the patentability of the invention. It is optionally followed by an examination, performed by an International Preliminary Examining Authority. Finally, the relevant national or regional authorities administer matters related to the examination of application, the contracting states, the states which are parties to the PCT, constitute the International Patent Cooperation Union. The Washington Diplomatic Conference on the Patent Cooperation Treaty was held in Washington from 25 May to 19 June 1970, the Patent Cooperation Treaty was signed on the last day of the conference on 19 June 1970. The Treaty entered into force on 24 January 1978, initially with 18 contracting states, the first international applications were filed on 1 June 1978. The Treaty was subsequently amended in 1979, and modified in 1984 and 2001, any contracting state to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property can become a member of the PCT. A majority of the countries are parties to the PCT. As of 16 March 2017, there were 152 contracting states to the PCT. Jordan became the 152nd contracting state on 9 March 2017, the PCT will enter into force for Jordan on 9 June 2017. From a practical standpoint, this could allow new ventures more time to locate strategic partnerships, funding, a PCT application has two phases. The first phase is the phase in which patent protection is pending under a single patent application filed with the patent office of a contracting state of the PCT. A PCT application, as such, is not an actual request that a patent be granted, the first step of the procedure consists in filing an international application with a competent patent office, called a Receiving Office. This application is called an application or simply a PCT application since it does not result in an international patent nor in a PCT patent. At least one applicant must be a national or resident of a state to the PCT, otherwise. If a PCT filing date is erroneously accorded, the Receiving Office may, within four months from the filing date, later changes in the applicant’s country of residence have no consequence on the validity of the international application itself. In most member states, the applicant or at least one of the applicants of the application is required to be a national or resident of the state of the office where the application is filed
12.
European patent law
–
For certain states in Eastern Europe, the Eurasian Patent Convention applies. Patents having effect in most European states may be obtained either nationally, via national patent offices, the EPO is a public international organisation established by the European Patent Convention. The EPO is not a European Union or a Council of Europe institution, similarly, Eurasian patents are granted by the Eurasian Patent Office and become after grant independent national Eurasian patents enforceable before national courts. Utility models, referred to as Gebrauchsmuster in Germany and Austria, are available in some countries, Patent applications can be filed at the relevant national patent office or at the European Patent Office. Alternatively, an application may be filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty. A European patent is the product of a unified grant procedure before the European Patent Office under procedures established by the European Patent Convention, a European patent is a regional, non-unitary patent. If the required translation is not filed, the European patent is deemed to have no effect from the outset in that State. The London Agreement, which entered force on May 1,2008. The European patent can be revoked under the laws of a Contracting State on certain grounds with effect only in that State, a central time-limited opposition procedure and central limitation and revocation procedures before the EPO are available however. The opposition procedure may only be initiated within nine months of the grant of the European patent, the limitation and revocation procedures allow the patent proprietor to centrally request the limitation or revocation of his own European patent. Countries may create unitary protection with regards to patents, which means that the effect is equal in all countries concerned, such unitary protection was effected by Switzerland and Liechtenstein in 1980 with the Treaty between the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on Patent Protection of 1978. National patents are available in all European countries and it can be cheaper and tactically advantageous to apply for a few national patents rather than for a European patent at the European Patent Office. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Patents Act 1977, UK law is in many ways similar to the European Patent Convention. National patents may be the only available patents in European states that are party to the European Patent Convention nor the Eurasian Patent Convention. This is the case for Andorra, Moldova and Ukraine, in Europe, utility models are available in Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Finland, Denmark, Russia and Spain. The term of a utility model is usually shorter than the term of a patent and has less stringent patentability requirements, in practice however, the interpretation of common substantive provisions have led to different interpretations in different European countries. Regarding procedural law, and especially regarding the procedures to examine infringement and validity of patents before national courts, according to Mr Justice Kitchin, a British judge. It is desirable to try infringement and validity issues together, where at all possible, if they are tried separately it is all too easy for the patentee to argue for a narrow interpretation of his claim when defending it but an expansive interpretation when asserting infringement
