In a second case between DexCom and Abbott, DexCom claimed against Abbott for infringement of a divisional patent by its glucose monitoring system. However, Abbott, in a similar fashion as with the parent patent, also counterclaimed for revocation of the divisional patent. Case date: 31 July 2024 Case number: CFI 233/2023547520/20232178/2024 Court: UPC Local divisions of the…
On 27 August 2024, the Munich Local Division awarded a preliminary injunction (‘PI’) in an action brought by Hand Held Products against Scandit for infringement of EP3866051 (“Mobile computer configured to read multiple decodable indicia”) in relation to Scandit’s ‘Data Capture SDK’ software (Order UPC_CFI_74/2024). The Court held that Scandit’s software development kit (SDK) more…
The first Over-the-Counter Continuous Glucose Monitor (CGM) ever cleared in the United Stated by the FDA was launched by Dexcom. The Stelo Glucose Biosensor System (commercial name) has been cleared for anyone 18 years or older who does not use insulin (such as individuals with diabetes treating their condition with oral medications, or those without…
The BRPTO published on August 28, 2024, Appeal Board Ordinance #4, a rule intended to provide internal guidelines for the examiners responsible for analyzing appeals of patent applications, the so called “second instance” in Brazil. This Ordinance brings structured and standardized procedures that the examiners shall observe when analyzing appeals briefs ensuring consistency, transparency and…
Reading the title of this paper, perhaps you will smile, thinking about all the discussions that this issue has already ignited, even before the UPC came into force. Since the beginning, most patentees in the pharmaceutical field were suspicious concerning the new jurisdiction, especially regarding the same old question: pro-patentee or not? Hostile/not hostile to…
Background In June 2024, we reported that in an application for provisional measures brought by Abbott Diabetes Care against Sibio Technology, The Hague Local Division (“LD”) determined, inter alia, that it had competence for Ireland, in the sense that it could grant a PI extending to Ireland under European patent validated in that country. In…
This is part II of an open letter directed to the President of the EPO in his capacity to give directions on the composition of Opposition Divisions. Article 19 EPC explicitly permits the Primary Examiner to be member of an Opposition Division. Many applicants and representatives, however, have a feeling of bias in favour of…
In a long awaited, but timely decision the Düsseldorf local division has the honour to be the first to decide an infringement case before the UPC. Indeed, the court lived up to its promise to deliver a decision in about 1 year. The decision itself, where the patent was found invalid, but an auxiliary request…
On 12 July 2024 the English Court of Appeal gave its second FRAND determination judgment, in the context of an appeal and cross-appeal of Mellor J’s first instance decision in IDC v Lenovo. This decision continues the English Court’s theme, first developed in Unwired Planet, of taking a pragmatic approach to arriving at a set…
Bolivia’s industrial property law, Decision No. 486 of the Andean Community, contains an article that defines what cannot be patented. This article 20 b) is currently the subject of controversy due to Bolivian Patent Office’s interpretation thereof. Article 20 b) establishes that not patentable are: (b) inventions the commercial exploitation of which in the member…
