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

09.09.19

The European Patent Convention (“EPC”) Does Not Allow Patenting of Life Itself

Posted in Europe, Patents at 10:10 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Wedding Invitation

Summary: Unless the underlying rules are respected and Europe’s largest patent office actually follows the laws it’s governed by, Europe’s patent system won’t promote innovation; the European Patent Office’s decision on Alexion (patent application 3124029 rejected) is good news

BOTH the European Patent Office (EPO) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) still grapple with a question that should not even be asked. Why? Because the answer to it should be obvious. The American 35 U.S.C. § 101 is pretty clear about naturally-recurring phenomena and Europe has already spoken — many times in fact — about patents on life. If only Campinos and Battistelli actually obeyed the law…

Today’s EPO not only tolerates patents on life and nature; it’s also actively promoting software patents in Europe. The EPO is totally out of control!

To our surprise, and for a change, yesterday we saw this article from Phil Taylor (pharmaphorum). When patents are misused not for elevation of the sciences but for monopoly that enables ruinous price hikes in medicines this is what should happen:

The European Patent Office has blocked an attempt by Alexion to extend the patent protection for its blockbuster drug Soliris, setting up biosimilar competition from 2022.

The EPO delivered its verdict late last week but Alexion’s share price remained unscathed by the news, suggesting investors are confident that the company will be able to migrate revenues to its follow-up drug Ultomiris by that date.

In a brief Securities & Exchange Commission filing, Alexion said the EPO had rejected its attempt to extend two patents for Soliris (eculizumab) and it is considering an appeal.

It’s also facing a patent challenge to Soliris in the US from Amgen, which is developing a biosimilar version of the drug called ABP 959 and has petitioned the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to review Alexion’s intellectual property on the drug. It made the move after Alexion won an extension on its US patent life until 2027.

Soliris – a complement C5 inhibitor used to treat several rare diseases including paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) and atypical haemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) – achieved sales of $1.94 billion in the first six months of the year, accounting for more than 80% of the biotech’s total sales in that period.

Kelly Davio (Center for Biosimilars, i.e. patent maximalists and monopolists) responded as follows to the EPO denying antibody patents:

Last week, Alexion disclosed in a filing to the US Securities and Exchange Commission that the European Patent Office (EPO) did not grant Alexion its request for 2 patents on its brand-name eculizumab product, Soliris, a C5 complement inhibitor that treats rare and ultrarare diseases.

The Form 8-K, dated September 5, indicates that the office declined to grant patent application 3124029, which covers a pharmaceutical composition comprising an antibody or antibody fragment binding to C5 for use in treating a patient with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), and patent application 3167888, which relates to the composition of matter of eculizumab.

This will probably be mentioned by patent maximalists’ blogs such as IP Kat and Kluwer Patent Blog in days to come. Both like to promote patents on life/nature, especially in their current composition (they’re both run by Big Pharma firms and their lawyers).

Mind this new IP Kat comment from “CRISPR scientist” (profiteer), who defends monopolies on life itself, ignoring health risks: “It would be feasible, but it would require a separate round of gene editing since no one could want to introduce a marker into the functional gene that is the subject of the first round of gene editing. The gene editing process is complicated, time consuming and costly. And every round of editing harbors the risk of additional unwanted modifications. So, can there really be a benefit if one has to perform an additional round of gene editing only for administrative sake? I shall think no. [] I don’t think that reasonable people are actually worried about their own health. Genetic material in the food you consume has very little possibility to influence your body. And I do doubt that it may cause food allergies. As the article correctly points out, the actual risk is what will happen to the ecosystem. I agree that heavy dependence on fertilizer or herbicides is detrimental. However, that is not what CRISPR is about. Gene editing is simply a stunning, secure and reliable technique to modify a plant’s genome. Banning gene editing because it may cause harm in certain scenarios is much like banning operations per se simply because people may die if operated wrongly. We can’t igonore the benefits that gene editing is bringing a world where we need more nurtrious food and crops that are able to resist climate change.”

This is the classic propaganda/talking point from GMO proponents. We spent a lot of time and energy confronting these lies about a decade ago when we wrote a great deal about Monsanto, now part of Bayer in Germany.

Anyway, it’s nice to see the EPO rejecting bad patents, probably showing a little bit of respect for the EPC, for a change…

Miquel Montañá has just mentioned the EPC in relation to a case outside the EPO’s remit; he ought to take note of the fact that the EPO’s management violates the EPC every day, rendering it moot! To quote yesterday’s post from Montañá:

As readers are well aware, one of the difficult tasks when applying article 69 of the European Patent Convention (“EPC”) and its Protocol of Interpretation is to strike the right balance between “interpreting” the claims in the context of the specification, while, at the same time, avoiding “importing” features of the specification into the claims. A judgment of 12 February 2019 from the Barcelona Court of Appeal recently published has warned against the risk of using specification for the purpose of unduly restricting the scope of protection of the claims.

[...]

Interestingly, the Court of Appeal relied on the case law from the European Patent Office (“EPO”) Boards of Appeal (for example, T 1018/02, T 1395/07, T-544/89 and T-681/01) noting that, although they do not decide infringement cases, they do have to interpret the scope of protection of the claims when they examine validity.

Finally, the Court of Appeal added that, although in the past the Court had “read” in the claims features mentioned in the specification which were not explicitly mentioned in the claims, this was done in exceptional cases only, when the feature omitted in the claim was essential for the functioning of the invention. The Court of Appeal added that “But this is not the case, because the interpretation of the defendant and its expert relies solely and exclusively on the preferred embodiments disclosed in the drawings.”

All in all, the main teaching of this interesting judgment is that when applying article 69 of the EPC and its Protocol of Interpretation, care must be applied to avoid “importing” features of the specification into the claims.

Readers are well aware, as we’ve shown many examples lately, that European courts very often deviate from EPO judgments, which sometimes get delivered by the Boards that are afraid of the Office. This lack of independence is, in its own right, a gross violation of the EPC.

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. Understanding Thierry Breton: “Rhodiagate” and the Vivendi Universal Affair

    When the "Rhodia affair" became the "Breton affair"



  2. Links 18/11/2019: Last Linux RC, OSMC Updated

    Links for the day



  3. What GitHub is to Open Source

    Lots of prisoners inside GitHub



  4. Openwashing Institutionalised NPEs (OIN) and Software Patents With Notorious Managers From the EPO

    There’s a strong push for software patents in Europe (basically fake European Patents on abstract ideas) and IAM leads/participates in it with help from OIN, Grant Philpott (EPO) and — maybe soon — Breton (EU)



  5. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, November 17, 2019

    IRC logs for Sunday, November 17, 2019



  6. Links 17/11/2019: Slax Beta and Arch Conf 2019 Report





  7. Understanding Thierry Breton: The “Cost-Killer” Tries to Tame the National Debt

    The oligarchic policy of Thierry Breton at Bercy



  8. Reactions to Last Week's Thierry Breton Hearing

    Nobody is particularly impressed by Thierry Breton except those who know little about him (and he contributes to this lack of knowledge by obstructing, omitting, and misleading)



  9. The Open Invention Network Has Become a Guard Dog of (Some) Patent Trolls and It Misrepresents Us Under the Guise of 'Open Source'

    The Open Invention Network (OIN), in collaboration with Fraunhöfer, is promoting software patents and all sorts of other nonsense as part of ‘open’ standards in a new paper sponsored by the EU and edited by the former EPO Chief Economist Nikolaus Thumm (not Battistelli's choice); this is another reminder of the fact that OIN misrepresents Free/Open Source software (FOSS) developers and their interests



  10. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, November 16, 2019

    IRC logs for Saturday, November 16, 2019



  11. Unitary Patent is Dead Partly Because the EPO Demonstrated That EPC is Being Routinely Violated, Illegal Patents Granted

    Some elements of Team UPC have given up, whereas others try to push the lie that Unitary Patent/Unified Patent Court (UPC) is not an EU thing and that therefore everything is fine



  12. USPTO Rewards Microsoft for Corruption at ISO by Teaching People Proprietary OOXML and Promoting Its Use

    The world's most important patent office promotes Microsoft lock-in, revealing not only corporate bias but also highlighting ways in which Microsoft crimes continue to pay off



  13. No, Startpage is Not Dutch Anymore

    Startpage is still clinging onto perceptions rather than truths; it means that Startpage isn't just betraying privacy but it's also dishonest and untrustworthy



  14. Understanding Thierry Breton: Chirac's Entrepreneurial “Joker”

    Minister in charge of the public treasury was not a career politician but an “entrepreneur” with a proven track-record as a financial wizard and “cost-killer”



  15. Links 16/11/2019: New Debian Release, Wine staging 4.20

    Links for the day



  16. IRC Proceedings: Friday, November 15, 2019

    IRC logs for Friday, November 15, 2019



  17. Microsoft Doesn't Love Linux, It Just Buys Linux

    Microsoft's takeover or abduction of its opposition's voice isn't an act of love but an act of occupation, a hostile colonisation that enables digital pillage and plunder



  18. Koch's Reply to EPO Through ILO and Techrights' Interpretation of Koch v EPO Documents Help Show That ILO-AT is Played by EPO Management

    Sending cases back and forth, without the complainant being involved, means that justice is in eternal ‘limbo’ and thus the abusive management of the European Patent Office (EPO) — first Team Battistelli and now Team Campinos — can get away with anything the bullies do (no judgment of substance being delivered)



  19. EPO Running ILO's Tribunal (ILO-AT) 'in a Loop' to Perpetually Delay and Drain the EPO's Complainants (Aggrieved Staff) Out of Money

    ILO’s Administrative Tribunal — a court for aggrieved EPO staff and other international organisations’ staff (usually known as ILO-AT for short) — is a major farce; when “time is money” and lawyers charge as much as 400 euros an hour the EPO’s management can exploit/misuse its cash reserves to also game justice and buy legal outcomes



  20. ILO is Not Functioning and ILO-AT Helps the Abusive Management of the European Patent Office

    It is becoming increasingly clear, based for example on Koch v EPO, that ILO-AT is where a lot of money will be spent on lawyers and rarely will that result in real justice (but it certainly helps EPO management pretend that staff has safeguards)



  21. Links 16/11/2019: Wine 4.20, Picolibc 1.1

    Links for the day



  22. Understanding Thierry Breton: Moral Responsibility for “a Capitalism That Kills”?

    "...France Télécom which had previously been defined by an ethos of public service, by egalitarian working conditions and by a sense of universal mission, had now been transformed into a "cash machine” whose sole purpose was to generate shareholder value on international financial markets."



  23. FOSSPatents Conference is Against FOSS, Promoting the FOSS-Hostile Construct Known as RAND or FRAND

    Do not be misled by the term Free/Open Source software (FOSS) in the name FOSSPatents and whatever relates to it (e.g. FOSSPatents Conference); it's not about FOSS but against FOSS, or pro-FRAND



  24. Europe is Under Attack

    European politicians or political candidates pretend to be 'candid'; but they're agents of Power, or put another way, they're there to make the rich and powerful class even richer and more powerful by passing new, ruinous laws in the name of 'the people' or 'for SMEs'



  25. Links 15/11/2019: New Opera and Brave, GNU/Linux Flatpa(c)ked

    Links for the day



  26. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, November 14, 2019

    IRC logs for Thursday, November 14, 2019



  27. Understanding Thierry Breton: Toxic Management Goes on Trial in France

    "In each of these cases, the suicide served as a symbolic act of protest to denounce workplace conditions at France Télécom and attract public attention to its practices."



  28. Thierry Breton's Video/Live Grilling is Over, But the Grilling Continues Online

    Elite politicians aren't reluctant to give Thierry Breton the high seat (or throne); but everyone else realises that this resembles a corporate takeover more than anything



  29. The EPO's Low Patent Quality is Not Just Suicidal; It is Illegal

    With help from the besieged Boards of Appeal (BoAs), which complain that they can no longer judge cases (appeals/referrals) autonomously and independently, the Office in Munich continues to grossly violate the EPC and mimic China's ridiculously low patent bar, which even formally permits patents on algorithms



  30. Links 14/11/2019: Mesa 19.2.4 and GCC 7.5 Released

    Links for the day


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