France

(Cross-border) jurisdiction, (Indirect) infringement, Austria, Enforcement, European Union, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Novelty, Opposition, Priority right, Revocation, Spain, Sufficiency of disclosure, United Kingdom, United States of America, Validity

(Rospatt Osten Pross)/

Do we need a Community Patent? Do we need a European Patent Litigation System? Or does the current fragmented system have a hidden wisdom behind it? Judge for yourself!

(Compulsory) license, (Indirect) infringement, Biologics, EPC, France

(Véron & Associés)/

On 8 October 2010, the Cour d’Appel of Paris rendered a interesting decision about the interpretation of the wording of one of the settlement agreements which have been concluded between Institut Pasteur and the American health authority (DHHS/NIH) in order to put an end to the various disputes which opposed them concerning the paternity of the HIV-1/VIH retrovirus’ discovery and the patents relating thereto. The question at stake was to determine if a gp 110 protein was the subject-matter of the said settlement agreement so that Abbott, as a sublicensee of the NIH, could validly exploit in France that gp 110 protein in its detecting kits. Otherwise Abbott would have been an infringer of the Institut Pasteur’s European patents.

France, Injunction, SPC

(Véron & Associés)/

The holder of a SPC fearing that competitors submit before the expiry of its title a tender in response to invitations to tender, for a products’ supply after the expiry of the title, requested an interlocutory injunction to prevent an imminent infringement. Therefore, by three orders issued on 19 August 2010, the Judge in preliminary proceedings at the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris deals with two important questions, already known by other courts in Europe: which elements can characterise the imminence of the infringement? is an offer formulated during the validity of the title an infringement although the supply of the products at issue would take place after the expiry of the title?

(Indirect) infringement, Case Law, France, Novelty, Priority right, Sufficiency of disclosure

/

This judgement is one of many issued in the worldwide litigation pending between Novartis and Johnson & Johnson concerning Novartis’ patent for ophthalmically compatible extended wear contact lenses. The decision contains a recapitulation of all possible grounds for invalidity of a patent. The Court rejected the detailed claims of invalidity for lack of sufficiency, dealt…

Case Law, France, Procedure, Validity

/

The new French law implementing the London Protocol is immediately applicable, even to European patents granted before the entry into force of this new law. The Court held that the new law was procedural and should, as such, be enforced immediately with retroactive effect. A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer…

Amendments, EPC, France, Procedure

(Véron & Associés)/

By 24 similar decisions rendered on 14 April 2010, the Cour d’Appel of Paris held that new Article L. 614-7 of the French Intellectual Property Code, implementing the London Agreement, applies not only to European patents in respect of which the mention of grant had been published after 1 May 2008 but also to European patents in respect of which the mention of grant had been published before 1 May 2008. One of these decisions is here summarized.

Case Law, France, Novelty, Validity

/

In this case, the Court of Appeal of Paris affirmed a judgement of the Court of First Instance of Paris holding that a product “may not acquire novelty simply because it is prepared in a purer form”. The Court decided that “the parameters that are not inherent to the chemical compound itself, but rather are…