EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

06.27.18

J A Kemp Pushing the Boundaries of Patent Scope in Europe With Antibodies and SPCs

Posted in Europe, Patents at 5:30 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Even the USPTO isn’t too clear on antibody patent policies

“…currently there is an apparent tension between the USPTO guideline with which antibody patents are granted and the case law with which the validity of existing antibody patents is determined. The antibody “exception” of the USPTO written description guideline says that a claim for an isolated antibody binding to an antigen satisfies the written description requirement even when the specification only describes the antigen and does not have working or detailed prophetic examples of antibodies that bind to the antigen. United States Patent and Trademark Office, Revised Interim Written Description Guidelines Training Materials (1999) at 59–60 [hereinafter Training Materials]; United States Patent and Trademark Office, Written Description Training Materials, Revision 1 (March 25, 2008) at 45–46 [hereinafter Revised Training Materials]. In Centocor v. Abbott, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) held that a patentee cannot claim an antibody unless the specification describes it, even if he/she fully characterizes the antigen, and the court vacated a $1.67 billion jury verdict, the largest patent infringement award in U.S. history. The relationship between Centocor and the USPTO guideline is not clear. Although many commentators generally agree that Centocor at least restricts the scope of the antibody exception, they disagree over interpretation of the post-Centocor antibody exception.” (Source: “Written Description Problems of the Monoclonal Antibody Patents after Centocor v. Abbott”)

Summary: Patent maximalism is still a serious and an urgent issue for the EPO to tackle; the Office seems to have been dedicated to the interests of litigation firms rather than science and technology sectors

THERE are two types of patents that we oppose; one is software patents and the other is ‘life’ patents, or patents which pertain to what already exists in nature (or manipulated slightly from what’s in nature) as those aren’t actually inventions but monopolies on life itself. Ramifications include food prices, breeding, public health (e.g. cancer effects), and access to medicine. The EPC sets limits (if not outright bans) on both types of patents, but the EPO‘s management doesn’t give a damn. Production, production, production (where “production” gets measured in terms of granted patents).

“The EPC sets limits (if not outright bans) on both types of patents, but the EPO’s management doesn’t give a damn.”There have been many articles lately about António Campinos; it’s all about trademarks and hours ago it was reported that his agency (EU-IPO) had passed France.com to someone else, in effect taking it away from its longtime owner. Remember that Campinos is a Frenchman and recall the trademark stories about Battistelli at INPI. It does make one wonder what sorts of maximalists we deal with here.

“We’ve recently noticed J A Kemp, a law firm, repeatedly promoting patent maximalism across Europe.”Where does the EPO go from here as far as patent scope is concerned? Will Campinos undo the great damage caused by Battistelli on purely technical grounds (never mind the corruption and abuses)?

We’ve recently noticed J A Kemp, a law firm, repeatedly promoting patent maximalism across Europe. John Leeming from J A Kemp wrote about software patents earlier this year and earlier this month they spoke about antibodies, with the obligatory promotion of Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs)]. J A Kemp was again mentioned here very recently (it does promotion of “Patenting Antibodies at the EPO”).

Well, SPCs (related to UPC) are in many headlines this month because of a decision/announcement from European authorities and yesterday we spotted Mondaq’s spam/promotion, with statements like “ask your usual J A Kemp contact.”

It’s titled “Antibodies In The European Patent Office” (similar but not directly related to patents on life) and it speaks of patentability criteria as follows:

The European Patent Office (EPO) applies the same basic patentability criteria to antibodies as to other inventions, but it can sometimes appear that antibodies are treated as a special case. For an explanation of the basic approach adopted by the EPO, please see our related briefing Antibodies in the European Patent Office – Basic Principles or ask your usual J A Kemp contact. The present briefing is intended to develop those Basic Principles into a guide to the drafting and prosecution of patent applications for antibody inventions.

The briefing focuses on the most common type of antibody invention at the present time – namely monoclonal antibody products for which the target and any associated disease indications are already known. We also provide guidance on ensuring your antibody claims are appropriate to support future applications for Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs).

It’s no secret that some of the biggest pushers for UPC are large pharmaceutical firms, which want to then impose SPCs and cement their monopolies. If the EPO obeys their malicious agenda, which threatens to spread software patents in the whole of Europe in one fell swoop (we know that the EPO recklessly grants these), then our challenges with the EPO as far as patent scope and litigation scope (UPC) are concerned will take priority.

“We’ve spoken about these issues for nearly a decade, but it’s only in recent years that technology firms put their weight behind groups and studies that demonstrate what we spoke about, hoping to sway politicians accordingly.”Our concern about this isn’t isolated. IP2Innovate, which fronts for technology firms, has just released this press release and told us about it. Amaury Libbrecht, Policy Manager at IP2Innovate, told us about “supporting innovation in Europe through a balanced Europe patent system…”

Notice the repeated warnings about patent trolls in Europe — a subject which patent trolls' front groups like IAM (together with Team UPC) tried hard to deny.

The latest from IP2Innovate, Libbrecht has told us, “identifies some imbalances in Europe’s patent legal system (i.e. quasi automatic injunctions, bifurcation/injunction gap, ineffective fee-shifting, poor patent quality and lack of transparency) and point out solutions to address these problems…”

We’ve spoken about these issues for nearly a decade, but it’s only in recent years that technology firms put their weight behind groups and studies that demonstrate what we spoke about, hoping to sway politicians accordingly.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 18/7/2019: OPNsense 19.7, Krita 4.2.3 and KDevelop 5.3.3 Released

    Links for the day



  2. Index: G 2/19 (Enlarged Board of Appeal, EPO)

    G 2/19 (Enlarged Board of Appeal, EPO)



  3. EPO Looney Tunes – Part 4: G 2/19 - Faites Vos Jeux…

    "Josefsson needs to bring in the “desired result” for his political masters in the Administrative Council if he wants to be in with a chance of reappointment."



  4. Media Not Interested in G 2/19, Which Demonstrates Patent Justice is Nowadays Impossible at the EPO

    The EPO spreads patent injustices to other countries and courts; the media is miraculously enough not interested, almost as though there's a coordinated blackout



  5. Librethreat Database Updated

    Database which keeps track of variants of attack vectors on Free/libre software now includes two more forms of threat



  6. A Look Back (and Forward) at Friendly Programming

    Historical perspective on computer languages and how to do better



  7. Red Hat's Freedom Reduced to Just Online Partner Enablement Network (OPEN) and Microsoft as a Close Partner; Canonical's Ubuntu Just an 'App' for Windows?

    Free software is being snapped up by proprietary software giants and patent bullies that treat it as little more than an 'add-on' for their proprietary offerings



  8. Linux Foundation Apparently Celebrates Sysadmin Day With a Microsoft Windows Site!

    The Linux Foundation shows ‘love’ to actual GNU/Linux (the real thing) by apparently rejecting it and badmouthing it



  9. EPO Looney Tunes – Part 3: The Legal Line-up for G 2/19

    The deck appears to have already been stacked for G 2/19, a decision on EPO judges' exile to Haar (veiled disciplinary action/collective punishment by those whom the judges are supposed to 'oversee')



  10. Links 17/7/2019: VirtualBox 6.0.10 and Mageia 7.1 Releases, Mint Betas

    Links for the day



  11. Links 16/7/2019: Btrfs Gets 'Cleaned Up', Clonezilla Live 2.6.2-15

    Links for the day



  12. EPO Looney Tunes - Part 2: The “Difficult Legacy” and Its Dark Historical Shadow

    Assuming that he was informed, then it seems fair to say that Battistell’s little “joke” at the expense of the Boards was in very bad taste



  13. EPO Noise Machine Turned On as Haar Hearing Kicks Off, Patrick Corcoran Defamed Again

    The EPO does not want people to hear about Haar; it just wants people to hear about how wonderful the EPO is and there are some who have just decided to slander Patrick Corcoran again



  14. Microsoft is 'Doing Kamikaze' (神風) on Linux

    An analogy for what the Linux (only in name!) Foundation and Microsoft mean to Linux — or by extension to GNU/Linux and Free software whose largest repository Microsoft took control of



  15. The 'New' Linux.com Sometimes Feels Like a Microsoft Promotion Site

    Anything that the ‘Linux’ Foundation touches seems to turn into its proprietors’ agenda; one of those proprietors is Microsoft, which has a "Jihad" against Linux



  16. IBM is a Threat to the Internet, Not Just to Software Development (Due to Software Patents Aggression)

    IBM continues its aggression against technology — a fact that’s even more distressing now that IBM calls the shots at Red Hat



  17. EPO Looney Tunes - Part 1: Is D-Day Approaching for Battistelli’s “Difficult Legacy”?

    European patent justice isn’t working within the premises of EPOnia; a bunch of ‘show trials’ may in fact turn out to be just that — a show



  18. Links 16/7/2019: LXD 3.15, Q4OS 3.8 and D9VK 0.13f

    Links for the day



  19. Links 15/7/2019: Vulkan 1.1.115 and Facebook Openwashing

    Links for the day



  20. Microsoft Office 360 Banned

    OpenDocument Format (ODF, a real standard everyone can implement) and Free/libre software should be taught in schools; it's not supposed to be just a matter of privacy



  21. Microsoft, in Its Own Words...

    Sociopathy, incompetence and intolerance of the rule of law, as demonstrated by Microsoft's top managers



  22. Microsoft's WSL is Designed to Weaken GNU/Linux (on the Desktop/Laptop) and Strengthen Vista 10

    What Microsoft does to GNU/Linux on the desktop (and/or laptop) bears much resemblance to what Microsoft did to Java a couple of decades ago



  23. Links 14/7/2019: Linux 5.2.1, Unreal Engine 4.23 Preview, Linux Mint 19.2 Beta

    Links for the day



  24. 25,500 Blog Posts and Pages

    With our thirteenth anniversary just a few months away we're at a pace of about 2,000 posts per year



  25. With WSL Microsoft is Doing to GNU/Linux What It Did to Netscape

    Embrace, extend, extinguish. Some things never really change even if they become an old and repetitive accusation.



  26. Allowing Bad Guests to Become the Hosts

    Why the so-called 'Linux Foundation', a nonprofit that acts more like a PAC controlled by proprietary software companies and people who don't even use Linux, is increasingly becoming a Linux-hostile front group



  27. Honesty and Collaboration Make Free Software Stronger, Microsoft is Inherently a Misfit

    In spite of all the lies Microsoft and its Web sites spew out on a daily basis, nothing has really changed and Microsoft is still attacking Software Freedom (mostly from the inside nowadays, helped by FUD proxies such as WhiteSource and Snyk)



  28. Patent Certainty Waning, But That's Still OK for Patent Trolls

    Patent maximalism remains a threat to everyone but patent lawyers (and patent office chiefs who measure their own performance only by the number of patents granted); best served are the patent trolls who extrajudicially attack already-impoverished parties behind closed doors



  29. GitHub is Microsoft's Proprietary Software and Centralised (Monopoly) Platform, But When Canonical's Account There Gets Compromised Suddenly It's Ubuntu's Fault?

    Typical media distortions and signs that Microsoft already uses GitHub for censorship of Free/Open Source software that does not fit Microsoft's interests



  30. Canonical is Turning Ubuntu Into a More Proprietary Deviant of GNU/Linux

    Ubuntu is becoming more 'Ubinary'; binaries without their source code available are packed up and cooked up for (or baked into) the ISO; this may be good for widespread adoption, but it's not an advancement of freedom, a capitulation rather


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts