Rule 37 - Application of Article 33(3) of the Agreement
1. As soon as practicable after the closure of the written procedure the panel shall decide by way of order how to proceed with respect to the application of Article 33(3) of the Agreement. The parties shall be given an opportunity to be heard [Rule 264]. The panel shall set out in its order brief reasons for its decision.
2. The Panel may by order take an earlier decision if appropriate having considered the parties’ pleadings and having given the parties an opportunity to be heard [Rule 264].
3. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(a) of the Agreement, the judge- rapporteur shall request the President of the Court of First Instance to allocate to the panel a technically qualified judge if not already allocated pursuant to Rules 33 and 34.
4. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(b) of the Agreement, the panel may stay the infringement proceedings pending a final decision in the revocation proceedings and shall stay the infringement proceedings where there is a high likelihood that the relevant claims of the patent will be held to be invalid on any ground by the final decision in the revocation proceedings.
5. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(b) of the Agreement and not to stay the proceedings, the judge-rapporteur of the regional or local division shall communicate to the central division the dates set for the interim conference and for the oral hearing according to Rule 28.
Rule 37 - Application of Article 33(3) of the Agreement
1. As soon as practicable after the closure of the written procedure the panel shall decide by way of order how to proceed with respect to the application of Article 33(3) of the Agreement. The parties shall be given an opportunity to be heard [Rule 264]. The panel shall set out in its order brief reasons for its decision.
2. The Panel may by order take an earlier decision if appropriate having considered the parties’ pleadings and having given the parties an opportunity to be heard [Rule 264].
3. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(a) of the Agreement, the judge- rapporteur shall request the President of the Court of First Instance to allocate to the panel a technically qualified judge if not already allocated pursuant to Rules 33 and 34.
4. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(b) of the Agreement, the panel may stay the infringement proceedings pending a final decision in the revocation proceedings and shall stay the infringement proceedings where there is a high likelihood that the relevant claims of the patent will be held to be invalid on any ground by the final decision in the revocation proceedings.
5. Where the panel decides to proceed in accordance with Article 33(3)(b) of the Agreement and not to stay the proceedings, the judge-rapporteur of the regional or local division shall communicate to the central division the dates set for the interim conference and for the oral hearing according to Rule 28.