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 Ā£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!



BAILII [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 >> (i) Polytan Planungs -und Baugwsellschart Fuer Sportlagen mbH Co. (ii)Edel Grass B.V. and Fieldturf Holdings Inc. (Patent) [2010] UKIntelP o41210 (30 November 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2010/o41210.html
Cite as: [2010] UKIntelP o41210

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


(i) Polytan Planungs-und Baugwsellschart Fuer Sportlagen mbH Co. (ii)Edel Grass B.V. and Fieldturf Holdings Inc. [2010] UKIntelP o41210 (30 November 2010)

For the whole decision click here: o41210

Patent decision

BL number
O/412/10
Concerning rights in
GB 2329910 and GB 2350843
Hearing Officer
Mr A Bartlett
Decision date
30 November 2010
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
(i) Polytan Planungs-und Baugwsellschart Fuer Sportlagen mbH & Co. (ii)Edel Grass B.V. and Fieldturf Holdings Inc.
Provisions discussed
PA 1977 Section 72
Keywords
Revocation
Related Decisions
None

Summary

This is the consolidation of two individual actions for the revocation of two GB patents held by Fieldturf, GB 2329910 and its divisional GB 2350843. Fieldturf applied to amend these two patents under s75 during the course of these actions. As a result of the applicants for revocation stating that they no longer wish to pursue their applications for revocation under section 72, it was considered whether to pursue revocation in the public interest. The Hearing Officer found that revocation should not be pursued as there was no clear lack of novelty or inventive step in the claims as proposed to be amended. Despite some earlier reservations as to their clarity being expressed on behalf of the Comptroller, the Hearing Officer was satisfied that the proposed amendments to the claims were allowable in respect of issues other than novelty and inventive step. Therefore the Hearing Officer allowed the patents to be amended in the form sought by the proprietor and made no orders for revocation of the patents.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2010/o41210.html