Follow us : Twitter LinkedIn
Conseils en Propriété Industrielle / European Patent and Trademark Attorneys
Client Login
Home > Publications > Search for a publication

Search a publication

Title of Intellectual Property
European and Unitary Patent
US Patent
European Union trademark
International Trademark
Domain names
Patentability of Biological Material
Arbitration and Mediation
Regulation, Labelling
Wine and Spirits
Well-known TM, Dilution, Use
Accelerated Examination
European patent
Author name

Search result

15 publications

G3/19: Products exclusively obtained by an essentially biological method finally excluded from patentability

Philippe BESSIERE, French & European Patent Attorney
BESSIERE_SEARCH.jpg G3/19 concerns a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal by the President of the European Patent Office (EPO) following decision T1063/18 (Pepper) by a Board of Appeal which concluded that Rule 28 (2) EPC, prohibiting the grant of a European patent for plants obtained exclusively by an essentially biological process, was in conflict with the previous interpretation of Article 53 (c) EPC by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decisions G 2/12 and G 2/13 (Brocoli / Tomato).
Published on: 3rd Jun 2020

Breaking News : the question of the patentability of plants/animals obtained exclusively by means of an essentially biological process has once again been referred o the EPO's enlarged board of appeal!

By Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE and Philippe BESSIERE, French and European Patent Attorneys.
GAFPB.PNG It is now official: the President of the European Patent Office (EPO), António Campinos, has done what he said he would do… in asking, once again, the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal to rule on the patentability exclusion introduced into new Rule 28(2) EPC.
Published on: 19th April 2019

35 USC § 101: Further clarification of patent subject-matter eligibility.

By Sara HAINES, US Patent Agent.
S.Haines.jpg Two recently issued USPTO memorandums further clarify aspects of patent subject-matter eligibility under 35 USC § 101. The Vanda memo1 specifies methods of treatment that should be considered to be patent eligible under step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test2 thereby avoiding any further analysis under step 2B, while the Berkheimer memo3 states that examiners must provide substantiated evidence when additional claim elements are considered to represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity in support of 35 USC § 101 rejections under step 2B.
Published on: 30th Oct 2018

Isolated Nucleic Acids are no Longer Patentable in Australia

By Frédérique FAIVRE PETIT, Partner
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg On 7 October 2015, the High Court of Australia ruled in favour of the non-patentability of isolated nucleic acids.
Published on: 15th Oct 2015

Human Embryonic Stem Cell Patentability in Europe and the United States

By Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE, French and European Patent Attorney
v2387-Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE.jpg Today, the position of the European Patent Office (EPO) as to the patentability of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) is clear. A European patent can only protect an invention involving such cells if, at the "relevant date", the cells could be obtained by means other than the destruction of a human embryo.
Published on: 25th Jun 2015

The US patent system (still) requires more than the laws of Nature…

By Frédérique FAIVRE PETIT, Partner
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg US patent law is probably one of the most lenient in the world: it provides for no exclusion in principle and requires solely that an invention must be, as a first condition, useful (within the meaning of 35 USC 101) before it is examined from the viewpoint of "conventional" patentability criteria such as novelty and inventive step.
Published on: 28th Jul 2014

MYRIAD: Over 30 years of practice is being revisited by the United States Supreme Court:Isolated DNA is now longer patentable! Hard times for United States protected biotechnology inventions

Frédérique FAIVRE PETIT, Partner
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg The Biotechnology industry has been decidedly mistreated by recent decisions in the US which are disrupting over 30 years of practice concerning the protection of inventions relating to or involving genes. This is creating a great uncertainty about the value of corresponding US patents.
Published on: 1st Jul 2013

Patentability of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Lines

By Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE, French Patent Attorney
v2387-Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE.jpg While the Brüstle vs. Greenpeace decision does not aim to influence the European Patent Office (EPO), we nevertheless anticipated that it may well result in the hardening of the EPO’s position concerning the patentability of human embryonic stem cell lines...
Published on: 14th Jun 2013

Myriad : Second confirmation of patentability of isolated DNA. Will this be the final chapter?

By Frédérique FAIVRE PETIT, Partner
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg For the third time, an American Court has decided on patentability of «genes», confirming the previous decision, which reversed the first one…. But let us start from the beginning.
Published on: 19th Sept 2012

Are patents and diagnostic methods compatible? Europe - United States - Canada - Brazil - India - China - Japan - Korea - Australia

By FAIVRE PETIT Frédérique, Partner
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg Whereas one might think ideally medicine should one day be able to diagnose everything, this has not been achieved yet, although... The pharmaceutical and diagnosis industries...
Published on: 2nd Jul 2012


By Franck TETAZ, Partner
F.Tetaz 65x65.jpg How the Supreme Court of the United States of America has made a distinction between a patentable invention and a scientific discovery, thus creating new difficulties in protecting inventions in the area of diagnostic research in this country.
Published on: 16th May 2012

Patentability of embryonic stem cells - after the European Patent Office, the European Court of Justice gives its opinion

By Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE, IP engineer
v2387-Gabrielle FAURE-ANDRE.jpg Pursuant to Article 6(2)(c) of Directive 98/44/EC of the European Patent Convention (EPC), the use of «human embryos» for industrial or commercial purposes is not patentable.
Published on: 14th Feb 2012

G1/07 : Answers, and answers between the lines

By Stéphanie Célaire - European and French Patent Attorney - Cabinet REGIMBEAU
v2417-Stéphanie CELAIRE.jpg Decision G001/07 was eagerly awaited in the field of medical imaging methods for diagnostic purposes.
Published on: 8th April 2010

Laws on Bioethics in France

By Frédérique Faivre Petit, French and European Patent Attorney, Partner - Cabinet REGIMBEAU
vignette F.FAIVRE-PETIT (3).jpg Laws on Bioethics were first laid down in France in 1994. The principle then set out by the law-maker was that they should be reviewed after 5 years.
Published on: 4th Sept 2009

Case G 2/07 : Coming soon, an interpretation of the expression « Essentially biological process» by the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeal

By Franck TETAZ, Partner, Cabinet REGIMBEAU And Lucile VERNOUX, IP Engineer, Cabinet REGIMBEAU
v5671- Lucille VERNOUX.jpg Decision G 1/98, later taken up in the “biotechnologies” directive, validated the patentability of plants produced through genetic engineering and their preparation processes when they are not limited....
Published on: 1st Feb 2008