OJ EPO 2008, 544 - Patent Prosecution Highway Pilot Programme between the European Patent Office and the United States Patent and Trademark Office1

I. Background

The European Patent Office (EPO) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced on 28 April 2008 that they intended to launch a new trial co-operation initiative called the Patent Prosecution Highway in September 2008.

OJ EPO 2008, 567 - Decisions of the boards of appeal

Decision of the Legal Board of Appeal dated 31 March 2008 J 10/07 3.1.01

(Translation)

Composition of the board:

Chairman: Members:

Appellant: Amazonen-Werke H. Dreyer GmbH & Co. KG

Headword: Subsequent filing of drawings/AMAZONEN-WERKE

Article: 80, 106, 108, 109, 111 EPC Rule: 40(1)c), 56, 99 EPC Article: 11, 24 RPBA (2007) Article: 5 PLT

Relevant legal provisions (EPC 1973): Article: 106, 108, 109, 111(1) EPC Rule: 43(1), (2), (3), 64, 67 EPC

OJ EPO 2009, 32 - Communication from the Enlarged Board of Appeal concerning case G 3/08

In accordance with Article 112(1)(b) EPC, the President of the European Patent Office has referred the following points of law concerning the limits of patentability of programs for com- puters within the meaning of Article 52(2)(c) and (3) EPC to the Enlarged Board of Appeal. The case is pending under ref. No. G 3/08.

The questions referred are:

1. Can a computer program only be excluded as a computer program as such if it is expli- city claimed as a computer program?

OJ EPO 2009, 36 - Decision of Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.02 dated 22 April 2008 T 1319/04

(Language of the proceedings)

COMPOSITION OF THE BOARD: Chairman: U. Oswald Members: J. Riolo, S. Perryman, A. Lindner, P. Mhlens

Applicant: Kos Life Sciences, Inc. Headword: Dosage regimen/KOS LIFE SCIENCES, INC.

Article: 53(c) and 54(5) EPC Article: 52(4) and 54(5) EPC 1973 Keyword: "Allowability of dosage regimen under Articles 52(4) and 54(5) EPC 1973 and under Articles 53(c) and 54(5) EPC 2000 referral to Enlarged Board"

Headnote The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal for decision:

OJ EPO 2009, 68 - Notice from the European Patent Office dated 18 December 2008 concerning oral proceedings before the EPO

1. The current practice for fixing the date of oral proceedings before the departments of first instance was published in OJ EPO 2000, 456. For the current practice before the boards of appeal, see Special edition No. 3, OJ EPO 2007, H.1.

2. On the initiative of the interested circles the criteria for the postponement of oral proceed- ings under Article 116 EPC before the depart- ments of first instance have been reviewed. Following internal consultation it has been decided that the procedure for changing the dates of oral proceedings should be adapted:

OJ EPO 2009, 96 - Decision of the President of the European Patent Office dated 22 December 2008 concerning the refund of the search fee under Article 9(2) of the Rules relating to Fees

The President of the European Patent Office,

having regard to Article 9(2) of the Rules relating to Fees,

has decided as follows:

Article 1 Refundable amounts

Where the European search report or the supplementary European search report is based on an earlier search report prepared by the Office on

an application whose priority is claimed, or an earlier application within the meaning of Article 76 EPC, or an original application within the meaning of Rule 17 EPC,

OJ EPO 2009, 114 - Decision of the President of the European Patent Office dated 22 December 2008 concerning the refund of the international search fee by the EPO acting as International Searching Authority

The President of the European Patent Office,

having regard to the Agreement under the PCT between the European Patent Organi- sation and the International Bureau of WIPO which entered into force on 13 December 2007, and in particular Article 5(2)(i) and Annex C, Part II(3), thereof,

has decided as follows:

Article 1 Refundable amounts

OJ EPO 2009, 140 - Reminder

Abolition of payment by cheque Since 1 April 2008 it has no longer been possible to make payments by cheque delivered or sent direct to the EPO (see OJ EPO 2007, 626).

References: articl5;

OJ EPO 2009, 142 - Referral by the President of the European Patent Office to the Enlarged Board of Appeal dated 23 October 2008 regarding divergent decisions of two boards of appeal*

To ensure uniform application of the law and in view of their fundamental import- ance, the President of the European Patent Office referred the following points of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal under Article 112(1)(b) EPC:

1. Can a computer program only be excluded as a computer program as such if it is explicitly claimed as a computer program?

2. (a) Can a claim in the area of computer programs avoid exclusion under Art. 52(2)(c) and (3) merely by explicitly mentioning the use of a computer or a computer-readable data storage medium?

OJ EPO 2009, 167 - Communication from the Enlarged Board of Appeal concerning case G 4/08

In accordance with Article 112(1)(a) EPC, Legal Board of Appeal 3.1.01 referred the following points of law to the Enlarged Board of Appeal with interlocutory decision of 8 December 2008 in case J 8/07:

1. If an international patent application has been filed and published under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) in an official language of the European Patent Office (EPO), can the applicant, on entry into the regional phase before the EPO, file a trans- lation of the application into one of the other EPO official languages with the effect that the language of this translation must then