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 >> William Egan (Patent) [2010] UKIntelP o01710 (19 January 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2010/o01710.html
Cite as: [2010] UKIntelP o01710, [2010] UKIntelP o1710

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


William Egan [2010] UKIntelP o01710 (19 January 2010)

For the whole decision click here: o01710

Patent decision

BL number
O/017/10
Concerning rights in
Patent application GB 0803988.5
Hearing Officer
Dr J E Porter
Decision date
19 January 2010
Person(s) or Company(s) involved
William Egan
Provisions discussed
Patents Act 1977 section 1(1)(a) and 1(1)(b)
Keywords
Inventive step, Novelty
Related Decisions
None

Summary

The invention concerns a device for controlling or preventing the spread of infections or contamination in a hospital. It is an apparatus which includes a dispenser containing soap or another cleansing or sanitising agent. A person is required to operate the dispenser before a door to or from a hospital ward can be opened, and a feature of the apparatus is that the switch or other device for providing a signal confirming that the dispenser has been operated is located within the dispenser part of the apparatus itself. The hearing officer found the invention to lack both novelty and an inventive step in light of the prior art documents at issue, but that some of the alternative claims put forward for consideration at the hearing were not shown to lack novelty or an inventive step by those prior art documents. The applicant was given 2 months in which to file amendments to the claims, otherwise the application was to be refused under section 18(3).



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2010/o01710.html