BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> Ms. Penelope Mary Townsend Mr. Hugh David Niblock Hunter Boot Limited (Patent) [2009] UKIntelP o05509 (24 February 2009)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2009/o05509.html
Cite as: [2009] UKIntelP o05509, [2009] UKIntelP o5509

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


Ms. Penelope Mary Townsend Mr. Hugh David Niblock Hunter Boot Limited [2009] UKIntelP o05509 (24 February 2009)

For the whole decision click here: o05509

Patent decision

BL number
O/055/09
Concerning rights in
GB 2410415
Hearing Officer
Mr A C Howard
Decision date
24 February 2009
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
Ms. Penelope Mary Townsend Mr. Hugh David Niblock Hunter Boot Limited
Provisions discussed
PA 1977 section 74B
Keywords
Opinions and Reviews
Related Decisions
OPINION 01/08

Summary

The patent relates to a sock for a boot, the sock having three defined parts: a lower foot portion, an upper portion for fitting snugly around the inside of the upper portion of the boot, and an outer portion for fitting snugly around the outside of the top of the boot. The proprietor of the patent has applied for a review under section 74B of the Patents act of opinion 01/08; that opinion had concluded that a proposed design of sock did not infringe the patent. The proprietor challenged the examiner’s interpretation of claim 1 and the specification, both the approach and conclusion under purposive construction.

The hearing officer found that the opinion examiner had followed the appropriate law in interpreting claim 1 and the specification and that the conclusion in the opinion was a reasonable one.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2009/o05509.html