THE people at the top floors of the European Patent Office's (EPO) building in Munich must be getting a little nervous. Battistelli's career is practically over, António Campinos sees patent quality plunging, and he is meanwhile lobbying for software patents in Europe, seeing that -- as per reports from JUVE -- demand for European Patents is decreasing. By ignoring the law and kicking aside 35 U.S.C. €§ 101 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office managed to fabricate 'production' (more monopolies granted), but as per this week's news (more in Daily Links), SCOTUS continues throwing all these patents to the curb, as do Federal Circuit judges and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The trend has been rather clear; a very small proportion of patents tested in courts manage to withstand factual scrutiny (witnesses, experts, testimonies etc.). It's considered a crisis of confidence (in patents) and certainty (in litigation).

"It's considered a crisis of confidence (in patents) and certainty (in litigation)."Patent law firms see the writings on the wall, so they've attempted a sort of entryism in the courts system (people like Judge Rader). But it won't work, it only serves to alienate people and Rader's court was consistently overturned by SCOTUS. As Benjamin Henrion put it earlier today, "if Boris [Johnson] has the CJEU as a redline, he will have a hard time defending UK staying in UPC. Cameron was heavily lobbied by GSK to remove the CJEU as having the last word on patent law. In the US, the match SCOTUS vs CAFC shows those patent courts are deviant: 8-0 !"

CJEU would be a key part of UPC, as envisioned/codified in UPCA. Cameron's UK stance on that matter may be revisited in the future (we've heard stories).

So in a matter of about a fortnight the UPC might be squashed for good. But never mind facts; the EPO certainly doesn't let facts get in its way. We find it unsurprising but still absolutely hilarious that Bristows' Richard Pinckney has just published "EPO confirms it is ready to grant unitary patents" (I can also confirm I am ready to receive a trillion dollars. I confirm, so...)

"Berlin would not go ahead, irrespective of the BVerfG’s decision, if there's Brexit. It looks like imminently there will be."No words can describe how those posts from Bristows make the firm look. Even Team UPC ridicules Bristows. These people are beyond delusional; they're mentally defunct.

Bristows admits that "[a]lthough the EPO’s report of the meeting refers to hope that the BVerfG’s decision will allow Germany to ratify the UPC Agreement and calls for the speedy implementation of the UPC system, it does not refer to the potential effect of Brexit on the system."

Berlin would not go ahead, irrespective of the BVerfG’s decision, if there's Brexit. It looks like imminently there will be Brexit.

Funnily enough even a loud Team UPC proponent has just tweeted: "DE Constitutional Court: Acc to the Court, of the 37 cases listed to be dealt with by the 2nd Senate in 2019, 10 were resolved. #UPC #ListOfLies Bundesverfassungsgericht - Jahresvorausschau 2019 https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/DE/Verfahren/Jahresvorausschau/vs_2019/vorausschau_2019_node.html …"

"Team UPC needs to screw its head back on if it wants to have any credibility left when nobody even mentions the UPC anymore."Yes, "ListOfLies"...

Way to alienate the court...

"Don't despair," I responded. "UPC is "Ready to Roll" because Team Campinos bought some wine and stored it at the top floor's cellar. Bristows says "EPO confirms it is ready to grant unitary patents"..."

Team UPC needs to screw its head back on if it wants to have any credibility left when nobody even mentions the UPC anymore. In 2020, saying "UPC is coming" is like saying that "Saddam has weapons of mass destruction" (in hindsight it was a massive liability to claim so). Several law firms will have their reputation tarnished and clients upset (over false promises) when all this UPC jingoism turns out to have been a lie, orchestrated principally to make "sales" (based upon wrong assumptions). ⬆