In May, the Enlarged Board of Appeal will hear a case on the lawfulness of conducting oral proceedings by compulsory video conference in case G1\/21. Companies, professional associations and patent attorneys have filed 22 amicus curiae briefs on the issue. Among them, an alliance of seven well-known German patent attorney firms is taking a position on the issue of video conference without party consent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
[\u2026]<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The parties involved had until 27 April to submit comments on the much-debated issue. A total of 22 companies, law firms, individuals as well as professional and industrial associations used the opportunity. [\u2026] The firms are opposed to compulsory oral hearings by video conference. They argue that the EPO should only conduct oral hearings via video conference with the consent of all parties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
[\u2026]<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Law firm Maiwald is also supporting a complaint from client Perdue at the German Constitutional Court, concerning the lack of a legal hearing at the EPO court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
[\u2026]<\/p>\n\n\n\n