Patent Office

[grandin]

Advice please....

I have had my evidence thrown back cause I did not submit the evidence as a witness statement....however, the Patent Office guidelines state:-

You should give your evidence in the form of a : witness statement

Now should in my mind does not mean have to??? And in my case it is only me and therefore I don't see a need to resubmit as a witness statement...waste of my time.

Indeed good account of meaning of should here ... http://www.davidj.org/stories/56/The_Meaning_Of_Should.html

Ah.....should I send the evidence back saying this is not a requirement as per your own guide says?

Lee

 

[Beasty]

Advice please....

I have had my evidence thrown back cause I did not submit the evidence as a witness statement....however, the Patent Office guidelines state:-

You should give your evidence in the form of a : witness statement

Now should in my mind does not mean have to??? And in my case it is only me and therefore I don't see a need to resubmit as a witness statement...waste of my time.

Indeed good account of meaning of should here ... http://www.davidj.org/stories/56/The_Meaning_Of_Should.html

Ah.....should I send the evidence back saying this is not a requirement as per your own guide says?

Lee

I read it as meaning that evidence should be submitted as a witness statement - i.e. you should give your evidence as a witness statement. It is an obligation - contrast with e.g. "you could give your evidence as a witness statement".

It also makes sense to require a statement of truth attached to evidence - just as it does in the DRS.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/should

 

[rob]

It also makes sense to require a statement of truth attached to evidence - just as it does in the DRS.

Regarding the latter, what would happen if submissions to DRS are later found out to be false?

 

[Beasty]

Regarding the latter, what would happen if submissions to DRS are later found out to be false?

Lying - as opposed to an honest belief that proves to be incorrect - would give rise to a right of re-hearing - DRS Policy 10(g)

A non-exhaustive list of examples which may be exceptional enough to justify a re-hearing under paragraph 10(f)(iii) include:

i. serious misconduct on the part of the Expert, a party, witness or lawyer;

ii. false evidence having been offered to the Expert​

However with no immediate costs sanctions - much less the type of sanctions that can arise where false evidence is given to court - one might say that this limited penalty is a function of conducting a dispute in a private system like this.

 

[grandin]

by contrast

by contrast beasty the relevant page says you must do this, you must do that and then says you should submit your eivdence as a witness statement.....

Alas a distinct difference is made...in my case is has no relevance as I have a controlling share of the company defending the opposition.... as such it is the company submitting evidence 'as is'....who or what is therefore the witness

Either way the guide did not state it was a requirement and therefore I will send the evidence back 'as is' and ask for my 50 quid back for the extension.

Lee