Dr Ursula Kinkeldey
Former Chair, Board of Appeal, European Patent Office (EPO); Former Permanent Member, EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal; Patentanwältin (German Patent Attorney); European Patent Attorney
Malcolm is best known to me by means of his important legal papers from 2013 regarding the law of priority under the European Patent Convention. This legal subject especially interested me when I was chairperson of an Appeal Board of the European Patent Office, later Enlarged Board of Appeal member. Therefore, I was very glad to be a peer reviewer when Malcolm came to me with his request.
Malcolm has a notably creative as well as also an analytical way of thinking about problems. His work in the critical subject area of partial/multiple priority contains masterful analysis of the existing law, which stands out through enabling the varied opinions of appeal boards and national courts during 15+ years to be appreciated as one context. Malcolm had courage to blend synthesis with analysis by giving his opinions and insights, which make his work more remarkable.
The above applies especially when considering the creative work of his 2013 and 2015 Journal papers that are particularly dealing with the so-called “Toxic Priority” problem – a novel IP concept that first came to attention in 2005 submissions by Malcolm to my Appeal Board. These papers are remarkable original efforts that disclose complex and new propositions in a structured, vivid, descriptive and colourful way which makes them accessible and engaging to the Journal readers.
Malcolm’s papers make an invaluable contribution in this whole matter, and catalysed discussion in IP communities to significantly help make sure of the addition of partial/multiple priority and the up to then “hidden” concept of Toxic Priority to the EPO’s judicial agenda. Chapeau!
August 28, 2015; Dr Kinkeldey peer reviewed some of Malcom’s published law papers