Vector Corporation v Glatt Air Techniques Inc

Vector Corporation v Glatt Air Techniques Inc

Proposed claim 13, by requiring the means to form the shielding gas stream to be within the upbed, adds subject matter not disclosed in the application as filed, constituting an unallowable intermediate generalisation. There is no express or implicit disclosure of such a combination. Further, no post-trial reformulation of the claim is permitted as it would require a new trial, contrary to established principles.

Parties
Appellant: Vector Corporation; Respondent: Glatt Air Techniques Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (patents) / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Patents Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; proposed claim 13 disallowed; no further opportunity to reformulate claim 13; existing claims 1 to 12 remain.
Legal Topics
Patent Amendment, Added Matter, Intermediate Generalisation, Sufficiency of Disclosure, Discretion to Amend, Novelty, Obviousness
Intellectual Property Law Patent Law Patent Amendment Added Matter Intermediate Generalisation Sufficiency of Disclosure Discretion to Amend Novelty +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vector Corporation

Appellant

Glatt Air Techniques Inc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (patents) / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division, Patents Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed amended claim 13 adds subject matter beyond the application as filed (added matter/intermediate generalisation)
  2. 2 Whether the amendment is allowable under s.76(3)(a) Patents Act 1977 / Article 123(2) EPC
  3. 3 Whether a further trial is required if claim 13 is reformulated

Ratio Decidendi

Proposed claim 13, by requiring the means to form the shielding gas stream to be within the upbed, adds subject matter not disclosed in the application as filed, constituting an unallowable intermediate generalisation. There is no express or implicit disclosure of such a combination. Further, no post-trial reformulation of the claim is permitted as it would require a new trial, contrary to established principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; proposed claim 13 disallowed; no further opportunity to reformulate claim 13; existing claims 1 to 12 remain.

Orders

  • Claim 13 disallowed as an amendment for added matter/intermediate generalisation.
  • No permission to reformulate claim 13 post-trial.