§§ 9-11. have passed official examination, and so been stamped with official approval. In the new form of patent (see Form D, p. 84) it is: recited that the inventor has "particularly described the nature of his invention," but no reference is made to the manner of performing it, which was inserted in the old form of grant as a necessary condition. Form C (p. 83) shows that the manner of performing must of course be properly described, and it is probably expected that the official examination of the complete specification will insure its sufficiency as regards the descripton of the modus operandi. Advertise acceptance (b) The reports of the examiners upon the specifications of applicants for patents are not in any case to be published, or to be open to public inspection, but they are liable to be produced in proceedings in "an appeal to the law officer under this Act,” or by an order of Court for Discovery. The law officer would, in any such case, doubtless take care that they are not opened to any inspection, by any opponent or other person, that may not be reasonably asked for, or that which would be injurious to the rights of the applicant. 10. On the acceptance of the complete specificament on tion the comptroller shall advertise the acceptance: of complete and the application and specification or specificaspecifica- tions with the drawings (if any) shall be open to public inspection (a). tion. (a) It is to be assumed that the advertisements directed under the new Act will appear in the official journal of the Patent Office (see section 40). As the complete specification and drawings, if any, are to be open to public inspection on acceptance in the Patent Office, it may be taken that acceptance and publication are contemporaneous. Opposition 11. (1.) Any person may at any time within two to grant of months from the date of the advertisement of the patent. acceptance of a complete specification give notice at the Patent Office of opposition to the grant of the patent on the ground of the applicant having obtained the invention from him, or from a person of whom he is the legal representative, or on the ground that the invention has been patented in this country on an application of prior date, or on the ground of an examiner having reported to the comp troller that the specification appears to him to comprise the same invention as is comprised in a specification bearing the same or a similar title and accompanying a previous application, but on no other ground. (2.) Where such notice is given the comptroller shall give notice of the opposition to the applicant, and shall, on the expiration of those two months, after hearing the applicant and the person so giving notice, if desirous of being heard, decide on the case, but subject to appeal to the law officer. (3.) The law officer shall, if required, hear the applicant and any person so giving notice and being, in the opinion of the law officer, entitled to be heard in opposition to the grant, and shall determine whether the grant ought or ought not to be made. (4.) The law officer may, if he thinks fit, obtain the assistance of an expert, who shall be paid such remuneration as the law officer, with the consent of the Treasury, shall appoint (a). (a) By section 11 a material alteration is made in the practice as regards oppositions to the grant of letters patent. Under the old law, when an opposition was entered, it could only be done as it were speculatively, the opponent had no means of ascertaining what were the contents of the provisional specification of the applicant whom he desired to oppose. Oppositions thus conducted in the dark, could not be heard in a satisfactory manner. Under the new law, for two months after the advertised acceptance of an applicant's complete specification (see section 10), the opportunity is afforded to any one of the public to inspect it, and ascertain exactly what the applicant describes and claims as his invention. Any one may, within the two months, enter an opposition at the Patent Office, but only on the grounds stated in sub-section 1 of section 11-viz., 1st, that the applicant had obtained his alleged invention from the opponent, or his legal representative; or, 2nd, that the alleged invention had been patented in this country on an application of prior date; or 3rd, that an official examiner had reported that the alleged invention was the same as that comprised in a specification, bearing the same or a similar title, accompanying a previous application. It is not stated that the previous application must be that of the opponent, nor would it seem to be necessary that it should so be, to support the opposition. Prior public use by the opponent of the applicant's alleged invention (though held to be a good ground of opposition under the § 11. §§ 11-12. old practice) appears to have been intentionally omitted in the new Act,-probably because the questions raised by such an objection would generally call forth a direct conflict of evidence, and practically involve the hearing of what may be termed an ordinary patent case. Any person who may find that an applicant is applying for, or has obtained, a patent for any alleged invention which he had publicly used or described before the date of the application, may at any time obtain a revocation of the patent, by proceeding as directed in section 26 (see p. 26), which provides a method of procedure far simpler than the old proceedings to repeal a patent by scire facias, which are now abolished. The proceedings in an opposition will be conducted in the first instance before the comptroller, with an appeal to the law officer. It is, however, to be noted that an opponent on appeal must be, in the opinion of the law officer, one who "is entitled to be heard" on appeal. There will be no final appeal to the Lord Chancellor as there was under the old law, but, as the law officer will have the complete specification of the applicant in evidence at the hearing before him, and is now, by section 38, empowered to take evidence upon oath, he will be in a position to give in each case a decision of a final character, which he could not do under the imperfect provisions of the Patent Act of 1852. The practice followed in the hearing of oppositions was not, and could not under the old system well be, settled and uniform, though the law officers have, especially during the last few years, endeavoured to make it so. Under section 38 (see p. 34), they have power to draw up rules regulating the modes of procedure before them. Probably notices of important decisions given by the law officers will from time to time be published in the official journal of the Patent Office, directed to be published under section 40, and providing for the issue of authorised reports of legal proceedings in relation to letters patent. See rules of law officers, p. 110. Sealing of patent. 12. (1.) If there is no opposition, or, in case of opposition, if the determination is in favour of the grant of a patent, the comptroller shall cause a patent to be sealed with the seal of the Patent Office. (2.) A patent so sealed shall have the same effect as if it were sealed with the Great Seal of the United Kingdom. (3.) A patent shall be sealed as soon as may be, and not after the expiration of fifteen months from the date of application, except in the cases hereinafter mentioned, that is to say (a.) Where the sealing is delayed by an appeal to the law officer, or by opposition to §§12-13. be sealed at such time as the law officer (b.) If the person making the application dies (a) A delay of fifteen months, or more in cases of opposition, will in many cases be detrimental to the interests of patentees, as it will not only curtail the fourteen years term of grant, but prevent the grantee from entering at an early period into the full enjoy. ment of his rights. He should, therefore, as mentioned above, take all possible means to prevent the delay from being longer than is necessary (see section 8, note (a)). (b) Where an applicant dies before obtaining his patent, the grant may be made to the legal representatives of the deceased person. Proper proceedings must be taken, so as to obtain the grant within twelve months of the applicant's decease. The old law allowed similar proceedings to be taken, and a grant to be made, within three months of applicant's decease. It will be seen that a further advantage, beyond what was possible under the old law is conferred by section 34 (see p. 33), which provides that in cases where a person possessed of an invention dies without applying for a patent for it, a grant may be made to his legal representative, if he is in a position to declare, that he believes the deceased person to have been the true and first inventor of the invention in question. 13. Every patent shall be dated and sealed as of Date of the day of the application: Provided that no pro- patent. ceedings shall be taken in respect of an infringement committed before the publication of the complete specification: Provided also, that in case of more than one application for a patent for the same invention, the sealing of a patent on one of those applications shall not prevent the sealing of a patent on an earlier application (a). . (a) Section 13 places a patentee in a more advantageous position as regards enforcing his patent rights, than that in which he formerly stood on lodging his provisional specification with his application. Under the old law he was prevented from taking §§ 13-15. legal proceedings in respect of any act of infringement that was committed before the patent was actually granted. The new law prevents proceedings being taken only in respect of acts of infringement committed before the complete specification is published at the Patent Office, irrespective of the time when the grant is actually made. Publication and acceptance of a complete specification take place at the same time. (See section 10, p. 12.) Section 13 abolishes the practice that was established under the old law, of refusing the grant of a patent to A. on the ground that a patent had been already granted to B. for the like invention, although A. may have been the first inventor, and also the first applicant for a patent; but had been overtaken in proceeding for the grant by the quicker procedure of B. (See case, Re Bates and Redgate, L. R. 4 Ch. 577. See also ante, sec. 7 (c). Note that the day of the application is the day on which it is received at the Patent Office, see P. rule 19, pp. 96, 97. Provisional 14. Where an application for a patent in respect protection. of an invention has been accepted, the invention may during the period between the date of the application and the date of sealing such patent be used and published without prejudice to the patent to be granted for the same; and such protection from the consequences of use and publication is in this Act referred to as provisional protection. Effect of tion. Protection by Complete Specification. 15. After the acceptance of a complete specificaacceptance tion and until the date of sealing a patent in respect of complete specifica- thereof, or the expiration of the time for sealing, the applicant shall have the like privileges and rights as if a patent for the invention had been sealed on the date of the acceptance of the complete specification: Provided that an applicant shall not be entitled to institute any proceeding for infringement unless and until a patent for the invention has been granted to him (a). (a) By section 15 it is provided that, after the acceptance of a complete specification, the applicant shall be entitled to his full patent rights, though he must wait until his patent is actually granted before he can take any proceeding for infringement. When, however, he is in a position (as he is after the grant), to |