Saturday, 2 July 2011

Publish or perish (ctd.)

I just had a look at the number of decisions published on the DG3 site this year. It confirmed my impression: we are way behind the figures for the preceding years. Now it is true that the DG3 site has undergone some face-lifting and this may well have perturbed the publication process, but the facts are there. Typically, something like 800 decisions are published during the first two quarters, but this year there were only about 550.

For the case law blogger that I am, this has direct consequences. Less decisions means less noteworthy decisions. As I try to have one decision per day – because I find it is a good and feasible daily exercise to consider one decision – I face supply difficulties. This week I almost had to stop posting as not a single decision had been published in almost three weeks. A year ago, I had a reservoir of more than forty decisions, which allows you to face such low activity periods – this year I have a stock of one or two. So if during the weeks to come you find that K’s law remains silent, it is just this: I will have run out of decisions.

Well, enough with the whining. There are more important things in life than EPC case law, nest-ce pas?

I wish you all happy summer holidays.


Rimbaud said...

Worrying figures indeed.
I'm afraid I will have to fulfill my promise and post some contrepèteries pretty soon...
Happy holidays.

Anonymous said...

If you really miss decisions, you could have a look at T1824/08 which is accessible via file inspection (application number 04758869).
It is interesting to see that
(1) prior art documents may be relevant to the issue of 123(2),
(2) the examining division should have written a second refusal on 123(2) instead of just sending the case to the Board...

oliver said...

Thanks for the hint. I do not know why I missed this decision, which has been published on the DG3 site in December. For those who can't wait, Le blog du droit européen des brevets has a summary.