• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Eva Maria Amoah
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Patent in production engineering revoked: Ultrasonic welding technology was obvious

19. July 2019

A German patent on a connecting element on an electrical line and a corresponding procedure were revoked by the Federal Patent Court in area of production engineering. Ultrasonic welding technology was obvious, although the patent claim was not directed at it.

Ultraschweißtechnik

The subject matter of the contested patent can be classified in processes and devices for the industrial attachment of contact elements to electrical cables, in the area of in materials technology and production engineering.

The teaching contained by patent claim 1 pursues as an innovation that the connection of an electrical cable to a metallic contact element is not carried out by conventional soldering or gluing, but can be welded using the special process described in the patent specification.
The patent also describes a sonotrode for the implementation of embodiments of the procedure.

Objection against grant of patent, revocation und appeal

The German patent “Procedure and connecting element on an electrical cable to a metallic contact element and sonotrode” (No. 10 2014 004 127) was published on December 17, 2015.
On Monday, 19 September 2016 – and thus within the time limit of 9 months after the publication of a patent grant – an opposition was filed against the patent pursuant to § 59 PatG and it was asserted that patent claims 1 and 5 were not new (§ Sec. 21 PatG) and that patent claim 8 was not based on inventive step.
The patent division then revoked the patent after a hearing in May 2018.

The patentee filed an appeal against this decision, which was decided by the Federal Patent Court.

State of the art: Welding process

An essential part of the procedure was the publication D4 (DE 10 2008 031 588 A1), which was used to justify the opposition to the patent. According to this brochure, during the cold welding process, the end of a copper sleeve facing away from the aluminium conductor can be pressed together like a beak, leaving only a narrow residual gap.

In addition, the Federal Patent Court clarified that an expert was required to keep abreast of technical developments in his field, in the case at issue, improvements in ultrasonic welding technology and the properties of new alloys.

Only ultrasonic welding technology leads to the required tightness

If it turns out for the expert that only ultrasonic welding of metal conductors, sleeves and contact elements leads to the required tightness without soldering or gluing, the procedure according to patent claim 1 results in an obvious way, the BPatG ruled. Indeed, since only a narrow residual gap remains, which is particularly preferably essentially liquid- and gas-tight, the expert closes easily that the edges are welded together. However, the degree of additional impermeability according to the patent in dispute which could be achieved by which measures was not indicated in the patent specification in dispute.

The pressing described in the publication also makes it clear to the expert that the sonotrode must be stepped to establish the connection and must obviously have two active surfaces with different heights. However, this was described in patent claim 8 for the sonotrode. The BPatG therefore ruled that patent claim 8 was not based on an inventive step.

Even if the patent claims 1 and 5 in the granted version were not expressly directed at ultrasonic welding or at a connecting element produced by ultrasonic welding, an expert would draw the conclusion, on the basis of the context set out in the patent specification, that nothing else should be protected, the BPatG ruled and rejected the patent proprietor’s appeal in its entirety.

Would you also like to protect or defend your patent?

Our firm has many years of expertise in patent law and in all matters relating to opposition, revocation and appeal proceedings.
Our attorneys are entitled to represent you before the Patent Office as well as before any court in Germany and internationally.
Please feel free to contact us if you are interested.

 

 

Sources:

Judgement  BPatG 19 W (pat) 25/18  (in German)

Image:

gumigasuki /pixabay.com / CCO License  

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconPatent Law Tag iconPatent,  BPatG,  federal patent court,  case law,  German case law,  appeal,  revocation,  German Patent Court,  not patentable,  § 59 PatG,  § 21 PatG,  Sonotrode,  Patent Court Germany,  revoked,  not new,  period for expressing objections,  production engineering,  materials technology,  Ultrasonic welding technology,  embodiments,  Objections against grant of patent,  objection,  metallic contact element,  electric

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Patent Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law
This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Recent Posts

  • Alkemie vs. Alkmene: word/figurative mark vs. earlier word mark 9. April 2021
  • Hitachi patent partially invalid in GER: code distribution for mobile communication 8. April 2021
  • Google vs. Oracle: Java API code falls under fair use! 6. April 2021
  • EuGH / Case Lundbeck: Restriction by object 29. March 2021

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

8. April 2021
Hitachi patent partially invalid in GER: code distribution for mobile communication

Hitachi patent partially invalid in GER: code distribution for mobile communication

29. March 2021
EuGH / Case Lundbeck:  Restriction by object

EuGH / Case Lundbeck: Restriction by object

23. March 2021
Employee’s invention with software

Employee’s invention with software

22. March 2021
EPO Statistics: Western world less innovative

EPO Statistics: Western world less innovative

19. March 2021
Enlarged Board of Appeal: Mixed inventions with computer

Enlarged Board of Appeal: Mixed inventions with computer

18. March 2021
Market Abuse SEP Data Package: OLG Karlsruhe

Market Abuse SEP Data Package: OLG Karlsruhe

Footer

Contact

Franklinstr. 61-63
D-60486 Frankfurt am Main
Germany

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Customer Reviews

Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB Patentrecht, Markenrecht, Eigentum hat 4,78 von 5 Sternen 23 Bewertungen auf ProvenExpert.com

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Info secure emails
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form