Patent decision

BL number
O/029/06
Concerning rights in
GB 2294077
Hearing Officer
Mr R Walker
Decision date
27 January 2006
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
The British Precast Concrete Federation Limited v Coventry University
Provisions discussed
PA.Sections 1, 27, 76
Keywords
Added subject matter, Amendment, Clarity, Delay, Inventive step, Novelty
Related Decisions
O/111/05

Summary

A request to amend was opposed on the grounds that (a) the proposed amendments (i) did not distinguish what was claimed from prior art jointly authored by the inventor, (ii) were not clear and (iii) added subject matter by deletion, and (b) discretion to amend should be withheld.

On the hearing officers construction of the expression 'slot-like' he found that claim 1, as it was proposed to amend it, was novel, inventive and clear, and that a request to delete a figure would have no affect on the scope of claim 1 and so did not add subject matter. Nevertheless, the hearing officer found that the patentees failure to make the whole story known, the patentees attempts to gain an unfair advantage from the patent and the patentees culpability for the delay in requesting the amendment provided compelling reasons for refusing the amendments.

Full decision O/029/06 PDF document205Kb