BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Betson Medical (Ireland) Limited (Patent) [2009] UKIntelP o35509 (12 November 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2009/o35509.html Cite as: [2009] UKIntelP o35509 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o35509
Summary
The patent ceased on 6 December 2003. An application for restoration was filed on 6 July 2005, within the 19 months prescribed under rule 41(1)(a) of the Patents Rules 1995 for applying for restoration.
Patent application number EP 96942553.7 was filed by Mr Betson on 6 December 1996. The application was later assigned by Mr Betson to Betson Medical (Ireland) Limited, a company set up to commercially exploit the invention. The application proceeded to grant, the EP (UK) patent forming part of a large European patent portfolio. As the majority shareholder of Betson Medical (Ireland) Limited, Mr Betson was responsible for ensuring renewal fees were paid. He took steps to ensure a satisfactory reminder system was in place and as such was aware of the due date for payment of the 8th year renewal fee in respect of the EP (UK) patent, including the final deadline date of 6 June 2004 for payment with penalties as appropriate.
During the relevant period for paying the renewal fee, Mr Betson experienced various financial difficulties. He used the financial support obtained from a number of personal contacts to cover everyday living expenses and to pay urgent bills. During this period, he also made strenuous efforts to obtain funding from investors in order to pay the renewal fees in respect of the whole European patent portfolio and sought funds to provide for the commercial exploitation of the invention covered by the EP (UK) patent. These efforts were not successful until after the final deadline for paying the renewal fee in respect of the EP (UK) patent had passed.
The comptroller found that Mr Betson’s efforts demonstrated that he was seeking funds; however the mere seeking of funds was not sufficient to show that reasonable care was taken in relation to ensuring the renewal fee for the EP (UK) patent was paid on time. The hearing officer sympathized with the financial difficulties faced by Mr Betson but considered that when funds were available to him, a choice was made to use these funds elsewhere rather than pay the renewal fee. The hearing officer was not satisfied that the applicant had exercised reasonable care to see the renewal fee was paid in time or during the six month grace period. The application for restoration was therefore refused.
