Preparing for the Unitary Patent

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Preparing for the Unitary Patent

Sponsored by

inspicos-400px recrop.jpg
christian-lue-8yw6tsb8tnc-unsplash.jpg

Jakob Pade Frederiksen of Inspicos P/S discusses the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court regime expected to enter into force by early 2023

The Unitary Patent (UP) and Unified Patent Court (UPC) regime is expected to enter into force in late 2022 or early 2023. Under the future system, patentees may request unitary effect for their patents in the 17 EU States currently participating to the system. Patents with unitary effect will not have to undergo country-by-country validation. 

The exact date of entry into force of the new system will be triggered by Germany’s depositing of its instrument of ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement. 

In preparation for the coming into existence of the new system, the EPO has implemented transitional measures applicable to European patent applications having reached the final stage of the grant proceedings. 

The measures will be available for European patent applications, in respect of which the EPO has issued its communication under Rule 71(3) EPC informing the applicant of the intention to grant a patent. 

The first transitional measure provides the possibility for applicants to file a request for unitary effect before the entry into force of the new system. Once the UP system has started, the EPO will register unitary effect. Requests for unitary effect cannot, however, be validly filed before Germany deposits its instrument of ratification, or before the communication under Rule 71(3) EPC has been issued.

The second transitional measure enables applicants to request a delay in the EPO’s issuing of the decision to grant a European patent until immediately after the entry into force of the  UP system. Patentees may thus benefit from unitary protection and hence avoid country-by-country validation in the 17 participating countries. However, only requests filed after the date of Germany’s depositing of its instrument of ratification will be allowed. 

In respect of cases, where time limits for replying to ‘office actions’, i.e., communications under Article 94(3) EPC, or time limits under Rule 71(3) EPC, are already running, applicants who wish to benefit from unitary protection may consider not lodging early replies with the EPO. Rather, applicants may wish to benefit from the full reply periods available in order to increase their chances of being able to benefit from the transitional measures.

 

 

Jakob Pade Frederiksen

Partner, Inspicos P/S

E: jpf@inspicos.com

 

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Value-added services give in-house counsel the satisfaction that they are getting more value for money, while law firms get the opportunity to win more work
A team at Boies Schiller Flexner is advising shoe company Kizik and parent company HandsFree Labs in the dispute
Nokia’s latest enforcement actions against Geely and Transsion joining Via LA’s AAC pool were also among the top talking points
Benjamin Kelly, the firm’s fifth IP partner hire in a little over one year, has experience in patent and trade secret disputes involving complex technologies
Half-year Talent Tracker data shows Pierson Ferdinand was among the most prolific hirers in the US, while in Europe, there has been a notable UPC swing
Exclusive data reveals in-house counsel want external legal advisers to build better client relationships and add value beyond routine work
Brett Sandford acted for Perplexity AI, which fended off the threat of a preliminary injunction to launch an AI-powered web browser
Stephen Yang joins us for our ‘Five minutes with’ series to explain why his role requires him to wear many hats
The complaint follows a declaratory ruling issued by the England and Wales High Court last month that said Samsung is entitled to an interim licence
Tobias Hahn explains how the firm's multi-jurisdictional setup enabled it to secure an injunction on behalf of Fujifilm relating to defendant Kodak’s non-UPC activity
Gift this article