Conseil Propriete Industrielle - IP Attorneys Conseil Propriete Industrielle - IP Attorneys

CAB 2016-2017 : une Major de promotion au sein de l’équipe PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB

 

Nous avons le plaisir de nous associer au grand succès de Laurence GIBERGY, collaboratrice dans notre Cabinet, qui a obtenu le « Certificat d’Assistante Brevet » avec la mention « Major de la promotion 2016-2017 ».

 

Laurence a une maitrise en droit et a intégré le Cabinet PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB en 2013 pour administrer l’ensemble des procédures juridiques d’obtention et de défense des brevets des Clients du Cabinet en collaboration avec une équipe d’ingénieurs brevets.

New team : AARONSON PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB

 

 

Nous sommes heureux de vous annoncer que les Cabinets de Propriété Intellectuelle PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB et AARONSON ont consolidé leurs activités pour fournir des services juridiques de haut niveau en droit de la propriété industrielle notamment marques/modèles, NTIC, copyright, franchising et droits voisins en tant que boutique IP véritablement paneuropéenne.

Le Cabinet PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB IP, fondé en 1996 avec son siège à Grenoble et ses succursales à Paris et à Genève (Suisse), possède une solide expérience en matière de dépôt, des procédures internationales et des litiges concernant des brevets, des dessins, des marques et d’autres droits de propriété intellectuelle et dispose d’un personnel technique diversifié, notamment en chimie, biotechnologie, génie électrique / microélectronique / logiciel, génie mécanique. La clientèle du Cabinet PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB est constituée principalement d’ETI très orientées à l’international. Son modèle économique repose sur la fourniture de prestations au forfait avec un accompagnement global de mise en place d’une stratégie de PI. Son équipe de généralistes spécialistes travaille comme un service de PI externalisé privilégiant la disponibilité, la réactivité et l’efficacité des coûts.

Le Cabinet AARONSON IP a été créé à Paris par Naomi Aaronson en 2015. Naomi est un mandataire professionnel enregistré auprès de l’Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle (INPI à Paris) ainsi que de l’Office des Marques et Modèles de l’Union Européenne (EUIPO à Alicante, Espagne). La double qualification professionnelle de Naomi lui permet de représenter aussi les demandeurs et les propriétaires de marques de commerce devant l’Office britannique de la propriété intellectuelle (UKIPO à Londres). Naomi a une expérience internationale avec une maîtrise professionnelle complète des langues anglaise, suédoise, italienne et française et possède une pratique étendue dans le droit des nouvelles technologies de l’information et des communications (NTICs), du copyright et du franchising international.

 

 

We are pleased to announce that PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB and AARONSON  IP Firms are consolidating their businesses to provide high-level legal services in industrial property law, especially trademark, copyright and neighbouring rights as a truly pan-European IP boutique.

 

PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB IP Firm, founded in 1996 with HQ in Grenoble and branch offices in Paris and Geneva (Switzerland), has ripe experience on application, prosecution and litigation regarding patents, designs, trademarks and other IP, and has a diversified staff of different technical backgrounds, e.g., chemistry, biotechnology, electrical engineering/microelectronics/software, mechanical engineering. Clients of PRUGNEAU-SCHAUB are mainly of highly internationally oriented MSEs. Its business model is based on the provision of flat fees services with comprehensive support for the implementation of an IP strategy. Its team of Patent & Trademark specialists and generalists works as an outsourced IP service focusing on availability, responsiveness and cost effectiveness.

 

AARONSON IP Firm was set up in Paris by Naomi Aaronson in 2015. Naomi  is a registered professional representative before the French Office (INPI in Paris) as well as the European Union Trade Mark and Design Office (EUIPO in Alicante, Spain). Naomi’s dual qualifications allow her to represent trademark applicants and owners before the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO in London). Naomi has an international experience with a full professional command of English, Swedish, Italian and French languages and is also fully knowledgeable in New Information and Communication Technologies (NICTs) law, copyright and international franchising.

 

You can meet us at INTA 2017 in Barcelona, but do not hesitate to contact us at contact@prugneau-schaub.com for any further information.

 

Brexit referendum is behind us. But what’s next ?

UPC project is on hold.

It will take several years for the UK to actually exit EU (Art. 50(2) of the Convention of the European Union). The UK has first to notify its intention to withdraw from the EU to the European Council, which wasn’t done yet, and then go through a two year (extendable) procedure of negotiations over the future relationship between the exiting state and the EU.

This gives a lot of uncertainties. read more…

OBLIGATION TO GIVE INFORMATION ON PRIOR ART FOR EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION/ EURO-PCT APPLICATION FROM 1ST JANUARY 2011

Under amended Rule 141(1) EPC, an applicant claiming priority of a previous application within the meaning of Article 87 EPC has to file a copy of the results of any search carried out by or on behalf of the authority with which the previous application(s) was/were filed (= office of first filing (OFF))

  • together with the European patent application or,
  • in the case of a Euro-PCT application, on entry into the European phase.

Therefore, when providing us with instructions to file European patent application or entering Euro-PCT application before EPO, claiming priority of an earlier national, regional or international application, please provide us also at the same time with information on prior art issued by the authority where the previous application was filed. When not yet available, please provide us that prior art information as soon as possible once they become available. When the previous application is a US provisional application for example and that no search will be established for this previous application, please provide us with a statement that the results of the search are not available and will not become available.

Rule 141(1) EPC applies to all European patent applications claiming priority. Where multiple priorities are claimed, the applicant has to file copies of the OFF search results drawn up in respect of all previous applications concerned.

The applicant’s obligation under amended Rule 141(1) EPC covers search results in whatever form or format they are drawn up by the OFF (e.g. search report, listing of cited prior art, relevant part of the examination report). The copy of the search results submitted must be a copy of the official document issued by the OFF. A listing of the cited prior art drawn up by the applicant himself is not sufficient for the purpose of Rule 141(1) EPC.

A translation of the search results is not required where those results are drawn up by the OFF in a language that is not an official language of the EPO.

New Rule 141(3) EPC provides that, without prejudice to paragraphs 1 and 2, the European Patent Office may invite the applicant to provide, within a period of two months, information on prior art within the meaning of Article 124(1) EPC. Where the applicant fails to reply in due time to the invitation under Rule 70b(1) EPC, the European patent application will be deemed to be withdrawn (Rule 70b(2) EPC). If the European patent application is deemed to be withdrawn under new Rule 70b(2) EPC because of the failure to observe the non-extendable two month period, further processing can be requested.