Ariston vs Linn Patent Case

[WJR]

For anyone interested in reading the Patent Case of William James Robertson (Hamish) (Ariston, Fergus Fons) vs Jack Yan Tiefenbrun (Linn) see the link below which should take you to the 35 page Patent Officers report.

An intresting read....

https://fromsmash.com/m6XV1e4otd-bt - Link created via Smash, the super alternative to WeTransfer.

 

[teemacs]

This is a UK opposition proceedings (under the old UK Act, a patent application was published at acceptance and there was then a three-month opposition period). It is heard by a Hearing Officer of the Patent Office. There is the possibility of an appeal to the Chancery Division of the High Court, which hears all intellectual property cases. I believe that there was indeed an appeal in this case, but I don't know what happened. It doesn't appear to be in the RPCs (Reports of Patent Cases, published since 1883).

 

[STD305]

It is a great failing in UK law that such cases cannot be revisited and rectified in light of evidence that later becomes available.

 

[teemacs]

It is a great failing in UK law that such cases cannot be revisited and rectified in light of evidence that later becomes available.

Cases can be reheard if new evidence comes to light, but it very much depends on the timing and the circumstances (and in which court the original case was heard). Expert legal advice is needed to ascertain the possibities.

IIRC, this Patent Office decision was appealed to the High Court, where Whitford J. (one of the best IP law judges) reversed the decision.

 

[teemacs]

There was a further appeal to the High Court from the decision of Whitford J:

The Patents Act 1949 and an Application by Jack Yan Tiefenbrun for Letters Patent No. 1394611

The Patents Act 1949 and an Application by Jack Yan Tiefenbrun for Letters Patent No 1394611, filed at England & Wales

vlex.co.uk

Unfortunately I've no idea what happened and finding out more would involve taking out an rather expensive subscription.

With regard to the Patent Office opposition decision, it's the old story - if the parties cannot convince the judge that, on the balance of probabilities, one or the other has the right to the invention, the decision will be in favour of the patentee. it would be interesting to read Whitford's reasoning for reversing the opposition decision, but I can't even find it, never mind access it.

 

[STD305]

It's very difficult if you have an idea, but you need an engineer to make some prototypes to prove whether or not it works, before you seek to patent it - and that engineer then steals your idea.

 

[teemacs]

It's very difficult if you have an idea, but you need an engineer to make some prototypes to prove whether or not it works, before you seek to patent it - and that engineer then steals your idea.

Before you show such an engineer a thing, you need to get him or her to sign a secrecy agreement. And of course, as a precaution, you can file a patent application before you make a thing. Patent offices take it as gospel that the thing works as described, they only look at novelty and obviousness. And in the USA you can file hand drawings - you only need proper drawings after allowance and prior to grant.