Patent decision

BL number

O/345/06

Concerning rights in

EP(UK) 0852363

Hearing Officer

Mr R C Kennell

Decision date

14 December 2006

Person(s) or Company(s) involved

Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc

Provisions discussed

PA 1977 sections 72, 74A and 107(4); PR 1995 rule 89A(1)

Keywords

Costs, Revocation, Stay of proceedings

Related Decisions

None

Summary

The defendant sought security for costs, alleging reason to believe that L Ltd, the company of which P (the claimant identified on Form 2/77) was a director, might be unable to meet any costs. P indicated that insistence on security might enforce withdrawal and thought this would prevent the filing of evidence, contrary to the public interest. The hearing officer recognised that the likely strength of the claimant’s case might be a factor in deciding whether to order security and that this would be difficult to assess in this case without further evidence - as would any consideration ex parte by the comptroller in the public interest if the claimant withdrew. He suggested that a written opinion by the Patent Office might assist in these circumstances and stayed the proceedings for 6 weeks to allow the parties to consider this. (If the proceedings did eventually continue it should be clarified whether P or L Ltd was the claimant.)