Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Germany: Third party interventions to ex parte proceedings

In a decision (BGH X ZB 4/14, "Verdickerpolymer II"), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has resolved the question of third party interventions to ex parte proceedings. The BGH found that there is no legal basis for third party interventions to ex parte proceedings of the patent proprietor requesting reinstatement even when the third party is sued for infringement of the patent in suit.

The German part of European patent EP 682 094, maintained in amended form after opposition proceedings, lapsed in Germany because the proprietor failed to pay the publication fee and provide a German translation of the amended patent within the legal deadlines. The patent proprietor requested reinstatement and a third party being sued for infringement of the patent in suit requested intervention to the reinstatement proceedings.

Section 59(2) PatG provides a legal basis for third party interventions to inter-partes opposition proceedings in the case of pending infringement or declaratory proceedings. Section 44(2) PatG explicitly excludes third party interventions to ex-parte grant proceedings.

The BGH found that the lack of a provision concerning a third party intervention to ex-parte proceedings if the third party is sued for infringement of the patent in suit is not considered as an unplanned legal loophole. The restrictive character of the provisions for third party interventions indicates a conclusive nature that cannot be generalised. It is emphasised that reinstatement proceedings are ancillary proceedings conducted in the course of main proceedings and if third party interventions to main proceedings are only allowed under exceptional circumstances similar hurdles must apply for associated ancillary proceedings.

With respect to decision BGH X ZB 26/70 "Hopfenextrakt", wherein an opponent was allowed to participate in reinstatement proceedings, it is emphasised that this decision has been issued under the previous law and is based on the prerequisite that opposition proceedings are conducted as part of grant proceedings. The decision is not considered applicable when opposition proceedings and grant proceedings are independent from each other.

It has been clarified that a third party intervention to ancillary proceedings is only allowable if the third party is involved in the corresponding main proceedings. Furthermore, the existing provisions on third party interventions are considered conclusive.

Tim Pust

Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbHElisenhof, Elisenstr 3D-80335, Munich, GermanyTel: +49 89 74 72 660 Fax: +49 89 77 64

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Allison M Hester, attorney at Moye White, outlines Mattel's litigation history and explains what trademark lessons brands can learn from the toy company
The Portuguese won a high-profile race to succeed Christian Archambeau as executive director in July
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP professional about their life and career
Van Anh Le, assistant professor in IP law at Durham University, assesses the US-Vietnam partnership and the potential implications for Vietnam's IP landscape
Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Shira Perlmutter, US Register of Copyrights, discussed the Copyright Office's role in forming generative AI policy during a House of Representatives hearing
The award marks one of the highest-ever damages received by a foreign company in a trademark infringement suit in China