Home » Posts tagged 'CJEU' (Page 3)
Tag Archives: CJEU
Apple trains its Reality Distortion Field on the CJEU
Apple’s annual iPhone announcement is today and the liberal deployment of the Reality Distortion Field is expected to be trained on Fanbois the world over. However, in other Apple news comes notice from the UK Intellectual Property Office that an Apple trade mark case is being referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union (Case C-421/13 though there are no available documents at present).
The case concerns Apple’s trade mark application in respect of the layout of its stores. Yes, you read that correctly, Apple’s store layout trade mark!
Unitary patent – Everybody expects the Spanish Opposition! (Part 2)
Back in March we noted that, after their previous joint challenge with Italy against the unitary patent system, Spain had filed two further actions, C-146/13 and C-147/13, at the CJEU against the European Parliament and the European Council. No details were available at the time as to the content of these actions. However, over the weekend this all changed with the publication on InfoCuria of the two actions.
Details of the actions and our initial thoughts are below. In the interests of full disclosure I should probably point out that our initial thoughts are ones of confusion: “what Treaty is that?”, “what does that mean?”, “Have you heard of Meroni?” and “Who’ll be the new Doctor?”*
Unitary patent – Everybody expects the Spanish Opposition!
Having (probably) failed in their attempt with Italy to derail the unitary patent package by poking the enhanced cooperation procedure with “the soft cushions” (see here), Spain has now wheeled out “the Comfy chair” and is bringing two further cases in front of the CJEU to try and stop the unitary patent system from going forward. (Those of you wondering why I’ve suddenly developed a soft furnishings fixation are respectfully referred here.)
Yes, Spain has now filed actions C-146/13 and C-147/13 at the CJEU against the European Parliament and the European Council (against Council Regulation (EU) No 1257/2012 [implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the creation of unitary patent protection] & Council Regulation (EU) No 1260/2012 of 17 December 2012 [implementing translation arrangements] – see here).
So what does this mean for the prospects of the system?
Stem Cell Patent Decision Prompts Questions in Parliament
Questions have been asked of Prime Minister David Cameron concerning the British Government’s position in relation to Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) decision in the Brüstle v Greenpeace case. It seems IPCopy’s earlier posting on this matter reflects the concerns of many with interests in the future of regenerative medicine that such EU-wide decisions are profoundly damaging, especially when they undermine the decision of a member state to fund such research with taxpayers’ money.
IPcopy 