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.
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. […] 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.
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.
This text is a press release from JUVE Patent. The full text version of the article can be found here: