Patent law Flashcards
Who grants European patent?
EPO
Which sentence is true:
European patent can be validated in Morocco
PCT establishes the procedure for:
obtaining national patents in countries designated by applicant
The procedure before the EPO could be carried out in
French, German and English
1977, Budapest Treaty serves as:
an aid in the disclosure of an inventions comprising microorganisms
True or False
1977, Budapest Treaty serves as: a tool for patent classification
False
True or False
1977, Budapest Treaty serves as: a legal instrument facilitating obtaining patent protection at international level
False
True or False
1977, Budapest Treaty serves as: an aid in the disclosure of an inventions comprising microorganisms
True
True or False
The procedure before the EPO could be carried out in French, German and English
True
True or False
The procedure before the EPO could be carried out in Spanish, German and English
False
True or False
The procedure before the EPO could be carried out in English only
False
True or False
PCT establishes the procedure for: obtaining international patent valid all over the world
False
True or False
PCT establishes the procedure for obtaining international patent granted by WIPO
False
True or False
PCT establishes the procedure for: obtaining national patents in countries designated by applicant
True
True or False
Which sentence is true EPC is a part of the acquis communautaire
False
True or False
Which sentence is true: EPC does not contain substantive law provisions
False
True or False
Which sentence is true: European patent can be validated in Morocco
True
True or False
Who grants European patent? WIPO
False
True or False
Who grants European patent? EPO
True
True or False
Who grants European patent? ARIPO
False
Patent law in the EU:
is partly harmonised in some areas of patent law
Please indicate answers which are false, when you consider unitary patent as a new tool for a patent protection in the EU:
broader territorial scope of patent protection at higher costs comparing to European patent
True or False
lease indicate answers which are false, when you consider unitary patent as a new tool for a patent protection in the EU: broader territorial scope of patent protection at higher costs comparing to European patent
True
True or False
lease indicate answers which are false, when you consider unitary patent as a new tool for a patent protection in the EU: possibility to obtain the EU-wide patent protectio
False
True or False
lease indicate answers which are false, when you consider unitary patent as a new tool for a patent protection in the EU: easier access to wide patent protection in the EU
False
True or False
Patent law in the EU: contrary to other fields of IP law (e.g. trademark law, design law) has not been harmonised yet
False
True or False
Patent law in the EU: is partly harmonised in some areas of patent law
True
True or False
Patent law in the EU: is fully harmonized due to existing a patent regulations and directives
False
The patent application was filed in Poland on May 25, 2017. Later the same person has filed a patent application for the same subject in Spain on February 20, 2018, claiming the priority. Then the same applicant filed the application for the same invention on June 21, 2018 in Canada, claiming the priority again. The novelty should be assessed as to
25.05.2017 in the second case and 21.06.2018 in the third case
Former employee unaware of misuse of confidential information has disclosed the details of invention. In this case:
the novelty of the invention has been lost
An inventor has submitted the patent application to German patent office on May 21, 2017 then he withdrew the application after six months. Nonetheless, he applied for the patent covering the same subject in Poland on April 20, 2018. Is it possible for him to claim the priority resulting from the first application?
Yes
A medical substance has been used in flu treatment for ten years. Then the new use of this substance for hypothermia treatment has been invented. The patent:
can be granted for the next (second) medical use of that substance
True or False
A medical substance has been used in flu treatment for ten years. Then the new use of this substance for hypothermia treatment has been invented. The patent: cannot be granted due to lack of novelty
False
True or False
A medical substance has been used in flu treatment for ten years. Then the new use of this substance for hypothermia treatment has been invented. The patent: can be granted for the first medical use of that substance
False
True or False
A medical substance has been used in flu treatment for ten years. Then the new use of this substance for hypothermia treatment has been invented. The patent: can be granted for the next (second) medical use of that substance
True
True or False
An inventor has submitted the patent application to German patent office on May 21, 2017 then he withdrew the application after six months. Nonetheless, he applied for the patent covering the same subject in Poland on April 20, 2018. Is it possible for him to claim the priority resulting from the first application? Yes, providing that he did not disclose the invention meanwhile
False
True or False
An inventor has submitted the patent application to German patent office on May 21, 2017 then he withdrew the application after six months. Nonetheless, he applied for the patent covering the same subject in Poland on April 20, 2018. Is it possible for him to claim the priority resulting from the first application? No
False
True or False
An inventor has submitted the patent application to German patent office on May 21, 2017 then he withdrew the application after six months. Nonetheless, he applied for the patent covering the same subject in Poland on April 20, 2018. Is it possible for him to claim the priority resulting from the first application? Yes
True
True or False
Former employee unaware of misuse of confidential information has disclosed the details of invention. In this case:
This was the correct answer
the novelty of the invention has been lost
True
True or False
Former employee unaware of misuse of confidential information has disclosed the details of invention. In this case: the novelty of the invention has not been lost since this is the sort of non-prejudicial disclosure
False
True or False
The patent application was filed in Poland on May 25, 2017. Later the same person has filed a patent application for the same subject in Spain on February 20, 2018, claiming the priority. Then the same applicant filed the application for the same invention on June 21, 2018 in Canada, claiming the priority again. The novelty should be assessed as to 25.05.2017 in all three cases
False
True or False
The patent application was filed in Poland on May 25, 2017. Later the same person has filed a patent application for the same subject in Spain on February 20, 2018, claiming the priority. Then the same applicant filed the application for the same invention on June 21, 2018 in Canada, claiming the priority again. The novelty should be assessed as to 20.02.2018 in the second case and 21.06.2018 in the third case
False
True or False
The patent application was filed in Poland on May 25, 2017. Later the same person has filed a patent application for the same subject in Spain on February 20, 2018, claiming the priority. Then the same applicant filed the application for the same invention on June 21, 2018 in Canada, claiming the priority again. The novelty should be assessed as to 25.05.2017 in the second case and 21.06.2018 in the third case
True
Mr Hans Mauritz is a US national employed by a German company based in Munich and having its laboratories in the UK and France, established and operated under the relevant national laws. Mr Mauritz spent 6 months working during an internship in each of the laboratories where he has developed an invention for which a European patent has been granted. Under the national laws of which country should the right to this invention be determined?
Germany as the country where the employee is mainly employed
True or False
Mr Hans Mauritz is a US national employed by a German company based in Munich and having its laboratories in the UK and France, established and operated under the relevant national laws. Mr Mauritz spent 6 months working during an internship in each of the laboratories where he has developed an invention for which a European patent has been granted. Under the national laws of which country should the right to this invention be determined?
This was the correct answer
Germany as the country where the employee is mainly employed
True
True or False
Mr Hans Mauritz is a US national employed by a German company based in Munich and having its laboratories in the UK and France, established and operated under the relevant national laws. Mr Mauritz spent 6 months working during an internship in each of the laboratories where he has developed an invention for which a European patent has been granted. Under the national laws of which country should the right to this invention be determined? France as the country where the invention was created
False
True or False
Mr Hans Mauritz is a US national employed by a German company based in Munich and having its laboratories in the UK and France, established and operated under the relevant national laws. Mr Mauritz spent 6 months working during an internship in each of the laboratories where he has developed an invention for which a European patent has been granted. Under the national laws of which country should the right to this invention be determined? The UK as the country where the invention was created
False
True or False
Mr Hans Mauritz is a US national employed by a German company based in Munich and having its laboratories in the UK and France, established and operated under the relevant national laws. Mr Mauritz spent 6 months working during an internship in each of the laboratories where he has developed an invention for which a European patent has been granted. Under the national laws of which country should the right to this invention be determined? The US as the country of the origin for the employee
False
The aim of the interpretation of a patent claims is:
identification of the subject matter of an invention and the scope of the granted protection
When determining patent infringement of a European patent:
Not only those features which are repeated literally in the allegedly infringing invention but also those which are obvious equivalences of the claimed features
Scope of a patent is determined by:
patent claims
The relevant point of reference for interpreting patent claims for the purpose of determining the scope of a patent is:
a person skilled in the art
Choose, from the following list, two correct answers to the question: When a patent expires, it
- passes into the public domain for free use
- can be exploited without a license from the patent holder
True or False
Choose, from the following list, two correct answers to the question: When a patent expires, it can be automatically turned into a so-called Specific Patent Certificate (SPC)
False
True or False
Choose, from the following list, two correct answers to the question: When a patent expires, it passes into the public domain for free use
True
True or False
Choose, from the following list, two correct answers to the question: When a patent expires, it can still be protected as a trade secret
False
True or False
Choose, from the following list, two correct answers to the question: When a patent expires, it can be exploited without a license from the patent holder
True
True or False
The relevant point of reference for interpreting patent claims for the purpose of determining the scope of a patent is: a person skilled in the art
True
True or False
The relevant point of reference for interpreting patent claims for the purpose of determining the scope of a patent is: an average user of a patented technology
False
True or False
The relevant point of reference for interpreting patent claims for the purpose of determining the scope of a patent is: a patent holder
False
True or False
The relevant point of reference for interpreting patent claims for the purpose of determining the scope of a patent is: the judge resolving a patent infringement dispute
False
True or False
Scope of a patent is determined by: patent claims
True
True or False
Scope of a patent is determined by: description and drawings
False
True or False
Scope of a patent is determined by: a patent office in the decision to grant a patent
False