Europe

Robert Stoll, partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath and previously commissioner for patents, examines essentiality audit data relating to 5G patents

In its first decision to consider the Trade Secrets Regulations, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court to grant an interim injunction under the regulations to prevent the import of allegedly “infringing goods” into the UK pending trial.

This article aims to discuss similarity of goods and services in case of an opposition against a trademark application before the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (the office).

The headline of this article might provoke amazement or concern among football fans. They might even wonder why Wikipedia missed this important event in the life of the famous footballer. The truth, however, is detailed below.

In a recent decision, the Athens Full Member Court of First Instance (IP Division) ruled that the successor-in-title of a patent is not entitled to a claim for damages regarding the time period between the patent’s transfer agreement and the corresponding recording thereof in the patent register. In essence, the court dismissed the successors-in-title’s claim for damages for the abovementioned time frame due to lack of legal standing, making it clear that damages can only be sought for the time after a patent transfer has been recorded .

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) dealt with the issue of acceptance of sales services in opposition procedures in the joined cases of C-155/18 and C-158/18 P, Tulliallan Burlington v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and Burlington Fashion.