Patent decision

BL number

O/379/02

Concerning rights in

GB2261923

Hearing Officer

Mr P Hayward

Decision date

31 May 2002

Person(s) or Company(s) involved

LuK Lamellen and Kupplungsbau GmbH v Automotive Products (UK) Limited

Provisions discussed

Sections 27, 72

Keywords

Rectification of irregularities, Stay of proceedings

Related Decisions

None

Summary

LuK requested to amend their patent under Section 27, to forestall revocation proceedings. The Office processed the application duly advertising the amendments, notwithstanding the fact that AP had in the meantime launched a revocation action under Sect 72. LuK requested that the Section 72 action be stayed and AP countered by requesting that the Section 27 action be stayed. The HO found that the Office should have stayed the Section 27 period under Section 27(2), but through delay had allowed the action to continue through the 2 month opposition period, and in fact, had still not properly stayed the action. In staying the action the HO held that, although Rule 110 did not allow this period to be extended, there had been an irregularity within the Office under Rule 100, which allowed him to set a new period for opposition to the advertised amendments. The period was set to expire two months after the final disposal of the Section 72 proceedings. The HO also set a timetable for the Section 72 proceedings granting LuK 4 weeks to file their counterstatement rather than the six weeks they were seeking.

Oral decision

To request a copy of the decision email sales@patent.gov.uk or phone +44 (0) 1633 813651.