THE Unitary Patent system or the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is a subject we have been watching very closely for a number of months. But hardly anything is said/uttered about it. As far as the media is concerned, it's already history. It's dead. There might not be a decision on it from the German FCC any sooner than 2019 and some estimate 2020.
"Don't expect UPC to ever become a reality; they might reconstruct and rename it, but that too can take several years and the EPO is already ebbing away."The EPO, we might add, has not mentioned anything at all regarding the UPC for a month and a half (António Campinos briefly said something about it on his first week in Office). We expect not much to happen for a long time, possibly months. Even Bristows spinners have been mum.
Ghosts of corrupt Battistelli are still lurking at the EPO. J A Kemp's belated mention of the Enlarged Board of Appeal referral a few days ago said this:
Shortly before the end of his term as President of the EPO, Benoît Battistelli referred (see here) the following question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
If notice of appeal is filed and/or the appeal fee is paid after expiry of the two month time limit under Article 108 EPC, is the appeal inadmissible or is it deemed not to have been filed, and must the appeal fee be reimbursed?
The referral is now pending under the reference G1/18. The main significance of this question from a practical perspective is that the appeal fee is not be reimbursed if the appeal is deemed inadmissible, but is reimbursed if the appeal is deemed not to have been filed.