Germany: Infringer cannot intervene in reinstatement procedure
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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.

hansen.jpg

Norbert Hansen


Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbHElisenhof, Elisenstr 3D-80335, Munich, GermanyTel: +49 89 74 72 660 Fax: +49 89 77 64 24info@maiwald.euwww.maiwald.eu

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The Grand Board said the applied-for mark would ‘trivialise’ one of the deadliest pandemics in history
Tim Chen Saulsbury explains why single-craft artisans inspire him and how, even at home, he’s never too far from another IP lawyer
The firm also plans to build an entertainment practice group and up its IP and antitrust offerings with a focus on foreign clients
An intimate understanding of a client’s sector is essential to winning new business, a survey of over 28,000 corporate counsel reveals
Counsel say a Federal Circuit ruling on the obviousness test for design patents may increase the time IP owners spend defending their rights
With INTA Annual Meeting over for another year, here are a few things Managing IP learned after attending IP’s biggest party
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Four sources reveal which tools they have been using – or building – to help them with a range of tasks from invention generation to claim sufficiency
Managing IP reveals Wednesday's highlights, including a discussion on how AI is helping lawyers improve their "gut instinct" trademark decisions
Managing IP reveals Tuesday’s highlights, including an illuminating discussion celebrating women in the workplace and the challenges that remain
Gift this article