BETA

Activities of Javier ZARZALEJOS related to 2023/0128(COD)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (recast)
2024/02/01
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2023/0128(COD)
Documents: PDF(227 KB) DOC(100 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Tiemo WÖLKEN', 'mepid': 185619}]

Shadow opinions (1)

Opinion on the Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the supplementary protection certificate for plant protection products (recast)
2023/11/06
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2023/0128(COD)
Documents: PDF(147 KB) DOC(54 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Magdalena ADAMOWICZ', 'mepid': 197490}]

Amendments (32)

Amendment 17 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
(11) One of the conditions for the grant of a certificate should be that the product is protected by the basic patent, in the sense that the product should fall within the scope of one or more claims of that patent, as interpreted by the person skilled in the art byin light of the description of the patent on its filing datethe basis of that person’s general knowledge in the relevant field and on the prior art at the filing date or priority date of the basic patent. This should not necessarily require that the active substance of the product be explicitly identified in the claims. Or, in the event of a preparation, this should not necessarily require that each of its active substances be explicitly identified in the claims, provided that each of them is specifically identifiable in the light of all the information disclosed by that patent.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 18 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
(12) To avoid overprotection, it should be provided that no more than one certificate, whether national or unitary, may protect the same product in a Member State. Therefore it should be required that the product, or any derivative such as salts, esters, ethers, isomers, mixtures of isomers, or complexes, equivalent to the product from a phytosanitary perspective, should not have already been the subject of a prior certificate, either alone or in combination with one or more additional active ingredients, whether for the same application or for a different one.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 19 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
(15) As a further measure to ensure that no more than one certificate may protect the same product in any Member State, the holder of more than one patent for the same product should not be granted more than one certificate for that product. However, where two patents protecting the product are held by two holders, one certificate for that product should be allowed to be granted to each of those holders, where they can demonstrate that they are not economically linkedpart of the same undertaking at the time of filing an application for a certificate. Furthermore, no certificate should be granted to the proprietor of a basic patent in respect of a product which is the subject of an authorisation held by a third party, without that party’s consent.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
(27) The Office should have the possibility to charge a fee for the centralised application for a certificate, as well as other procedural fees such as a fee for opposition or appeal. The fees charged by the Office should be laid down by an implementing act.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
(32) The examination of a centralised application for a certificate should be conducted, under supervision of the Office, by an examination panel including one member of the Office as well as two examiners employed by the national patent offices. This would ensure that optimal use be made of expertise in supplementary protection certificates and patent related matters, located today at national offices only. To ensure an optimal quality of the examination, the Office and the competent national authorities should make sure that designated examiners have the relevant expertise and sufficient experience in the assessment of supplementary protection certificates. Additional suitable criteria should be laid down in respect of the participation of specific examiners in the centralised procedure, in particular as regards qualification and conflicts of interest.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 22 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
(34) To safeguard third parties’ procedural rights and ensure a complete system of remedies, third parties should be able to challenge an examination opinion, by initiating opposition proceedings within a short duration following the publication of that opinion, and that opposition may result in that opinion being amended.deleted
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 23 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
(35) After the completion of the examination of a centralised application, and after the time limits for appeal and opposition have expired, or, the case being, after a final decision on the merits has been issued, the opinion should be transmitted to the respective national patent offices of the designated Member States.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
(40) WTo safeguard procedural rights and ensure a complete system of remedies, where the applicant or another party is adversely affected by a decision of the Office, the applicant or that party should have the right, subject to a fee, to file within 2 months an appeal against the decision, before a Board of Appeal of the Office. This also applies to the examination opinion, that may be appealed by the applicant. Decisions of that Board of Appeal should, in turn, be amenable to actions before the General Court, which has jurisdiction to annul or to alter the contested decision. In case of a combined application including a request for a unitary certificate, a common appeal may be filed.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
(41) When appointing members of the Boards of Appeal in matters regarding centralised applications for certificates, their relevant expertise and sufficient prior experience in supplementary protection certificate or patent matters should be taken into account.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The holder of more than one patent for the same product shall not be granted more than one certificate for that product. However, where two or more applications concerning the same product and emanating from two or more holders of different patents are pending, one certificate for that product may be issued to each of those holders , where they are not economically linked part of the same undertaking at the time of filing an application for a certificate. The same principle shall apply mutatis mutandis to applications submitted by the holder concerning the same product for which one or more certificates or unitary certificates have been previously granted to other different holders of different patents.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26
[...]deleted
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1
1. On a request made to the Office, any competent national authority may be appointed by the Office as a participating office in the examination procedure. Once a competent national authority is appointed in accordance with this Article, that authority shall designate one or more examiners to be involved in the examination of one or more centralised applications, on the basis of their relevant expertise and experience in the field.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 5
5. Each competent national authority appointed under this Article shall provide the Office with a list identifying the individual examiners who are available for participation in examination and opposition proceedings. Each such competent national authority shall update that list in the event of a change.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point a a (new)
(a a) relevant expertise and sufficient experience in the examination of patents and supplementary protection certificates, ensuring, in particular, that at least one of them has a minimum of 5 years of experience in patent and supplementary protection certificate examination;
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) no more than one examiner employed by a competent national authority making use of the exemption laid down in Article 10(5).
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 4
4. The Office shall publish a yearly overview of the number of procedures, including those for examination, opposition and appeal, each competent national authority participated in.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. Notice of appeal shall be filed in writing at the Office within 2 months of the date of notification of the decision. The notice shall be deemed to have been filed only when the fee for appeal has been paid. In case of an appeal, a written statement setting out the grounds of appeal shall be filed within 43 months of the date of notification of the decision.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Any written statement in reply to the grounds of appeal shall be filed within 3 months from the date of notification of the statement setting out the grounds of appeal. A date for oral hearing shall be set by the Office within 3 months after the filing of the reply to the grounds of appeal or within 6 months of the filing of grounds of appeal, whichever is earlier. A written decision of the Office shall issue within 3 months after the date of the oral hearing.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 4
4. Members of the Boards of Appeal in matters regarding centralised applications for certificates shall be appointed in accordance with Article 166 (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001. When appointing members of the Boards of Appeal in matters regarding centralised applications for certificates, their prior experience in supplementary protection certificate or patent matters should be taken into account.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. After the period during which an appeal or an opposition may be filed has expired without any appeal nor opposition being filed, or after a final decision on the merits has been issued, the Office shall transmit the examination opinion and its translations to the competent national authority of each designated Member State.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2
2. The Office shall charge a fee for an appeal, and for an opposition.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) where applicable, the filing of an opposition, and its outcome, including where applicable a summary of the revised examination opinion;deleted
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
An employee of a legal person may also represent other legal persons which are economically linked withpart of the same undertaking at the time of filing an application for a certificate as the legal person being represented by that employee.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 2
2. The combined application shall undergo a single centralised examination procedure, as well as a single opposition or appeal procedure, where it has been filed against an opinion or decision in respect of both the centralised application and the unitary certificate application.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) deciding on oppositions against examination opinions;deleted
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2
2. Oral proceedings before an examination panel or opposition panel shall not be public.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 5
5. This Article shall not be applicable to the time limits referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, or in Article 26(1) and (3).
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1
1. The losing party in opposition proceedings, including in related appeal proceedings, shall bear the fees paid by the other party. The losing party shall also bear all costs incurred by the other party that are essential to the proceedings, including travel and subsistence and the remuneration of a representative, within the maximum rates set for each category of costs in the implementing act to be adopted in accordance with paragraph 7. The fees to be borne by the losing party shall be limited to the fees paid by the other party in those proceedings.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 26(13), 29(8), 31, 41(2), 43(4), 44(6), 45(4), 46(5) and 49(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Articles 26(13), 29(8), 31, 41(2), 43(4), 44(6), 45(4), 46(5) and 49(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect on the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 6
6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 26(13), 29(8), 31, 41(2), 43(4), 44(6), 45(4), 46(5) and 49(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2
Articles 19 to 52, 54 to 56 shall apply from [OP: please insert: the first day of the 124th month after the entry into force].
2023/11/13
Committee: JURI