Intellicell Biosciences Inc (fka SVFC)

[BigBadWolf]

as the investing public ponders why, a SVFC patent link was somehow missing; the link is enclosed here for complete disclosure so, with that in mind, to have the patents approved they have to prove Novelty and Inventiveness. Simply re-wording the existing verbiage will not change the core novelty of the process. The EPO is not questioning the outcome from the use of stem cells only the novelty and inventiveness which is the key here.

They state repeatedly that many of the claims can be performed by the "skilled man" which means they are not inventive and not a basis for patent approval. How do you propose they re-word the process? It doesn't matter how they re-word it hence my earlier comment that they will need to re-invent the process which I doubt they can do. The process is what it is and appears to be unpatentable in the eyes of the EPO.

One would think anyone would use a flow cytometer when one wants to know cell yield. It's not an uncommon device used at all and not the source of any new revelations. How many different flow cytometer's do you think exist in the world today?

Cell yield sounds great but no one knows what an optimum cell yield happens to be. And what happens when someone boasts the highest cell yield yet someone else can achieve better more consistent results with a lower yield? More is not always better.

Maybe SVFC will issue the EPO a convertible note to help push this through. I bet Frank could help with that.

& from the below it would appear there was one link missing (glad to let the investing public wonder why) but the above may offer clarity as to why Omitted.

Curious...why do these patent links not include this one?

https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP11854049&lng=en&tab=doclist

Could it have anything to do with this?

https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=EV7SWG9J5324FI4&number=EP11854049&lng=en&npl=false

THE EPO has stated that multiple claims lack Novelty and multiple claims are Not Inventive.


Or how about the notification sent to the Company by the EPO on July 10, 2014 stating if the Company wanted to proceed with the application by filing a response to the objections made by the EPO they had six months to do so?

https://register.epo.org/application?documentId=EV92YNQT7470FI4&number=EP11854049&lng=en&npl=false

Only 45 days left to go to respond but unless the Doc has magically re-worked the process to qualify as "Novel" and "Inventive" you can kiss the European patent good bye. And those follow on patents...all based upon the same basic process...yeah they go away too.

If this were such a slam-dunk response to the EPO why hasn't the Doc responded with the appropriate material to "correct" the lack of understanding out of the EPO? The sooner he responds the closer to the patent he gets right? What's he waiting for?

Not to worry...I'm sure he'll send something in just to extend the window and further claims of the patent being issued "anytime now" can be perpetuated for another year.