Teisseire France S.A.S., le directeur de l'INPI, v. La Societe Routin S.A., Paris Court of Appeal, France, 30 March 2011, Case No. 10/10045
The Paris Court of Appeal here gives one of its first decisions regarding the admissibility of a third party appeal against the decision of the Patent Office Director to limit a French patent (further to the request of its owner). The Paris Court of Appeal ruled that such appeal was not admissible.
Routin SA sued Teisseire France SAS for patent infringement before the Paris First Instance Court. In counterclaim, Teisseire requested the revocation of the patent (lack of novelty, inventive step, insufficiency).In parallel with the infringement/revocation proceedings, Routin SA filed a request before the Patent Office requesting limitation of its patent, on the grounds of article L.613-24 of the Intellectual Property Code (introduced by law n°2008-776 of 4 August 2008), which was accepted.
Teisseire France SAS filed an appeal against the decision of the Patent Office Director to accept the limitation and claimed that the limitation was not a real limitation and did in fact result in a extension of the scope of the patent.
The Paris Court of Appeal ruled that such appeal was not admissible.