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: Infringer cannot intervene in reinstatement procedure

Recently, the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) had to decide on the request of a complainant, himself sued for patent infringement, to become a party in an ex parte reinstatement procedure concerning the allegedly infringed patent. After the European patent was maintained in opposition in amended form, the patentee failed to perform the required validation steps in time before the German Patent and Trademark Office (GPTO). Having been informed by the GPTO about the loss of his German patent, the patentee requested reinstatement and simultaneously performed the required validation actions.

A third party, sued for infringement of this patent, intervened before the Patent Office and requested to become a party to the reinstatement procedure, because it was directly affected by the outcome of the reinstatement.

The GPTO rejected the request to become a party and granted restitutio in integrum to the patentee for his patent. The Federal Patent Court and the BGH confirmed this decision.

In its decision (XZB4/14, Verdickerpolymer II), the BGH argued that the patent law provides the possibility for a party being sued for patent infringement to intervene in a procedure at the Patent Office only under particular circumstances, for example an intervention of the accused infringer in a continuing opposition procedure. This being lex specialis, the BGH denied a general possibility of intervention in any other Patent Office proceedings by a third party being affected by the outcome.

Reinstatement proceedings are generally an "intermediate procedure" in a main procedure, such as examination, grant, or in the decided case, a validation procedure. There, intervention is not provided in the law.

While in opposition proceedings, where intervention is implemented in the law, the intervener may become a party to a reinstatement procedure, the BGH concluded that there is no legal basis for becoming a party as intervener in ex-parte proceedings at the German Patent Office.


Norbert Hansen

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

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
Two orders denying public access to documents have reignited a debate over a lack of transparency at the new court
Rouse’s new chief of operations and the firm’s CEO tell Managing IP why they think private equity backing will help it conquer Europe
Brian Landry, partner at Saul Ewing, reveals how applicants can prosecute patent applications in the wake of the Federal Circuit's In re Cellect ruling
Ronelle Geldenhuys of Australia’s Foundry IP considers the implications complex computer technologies such as AI have on decision-making