Read all the (latest) blogs from:
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, EPC, Estonia, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America
The Italian Antitrust Authority (Autorità Garante della concorrenza e del mercato) announced on 26 October that it commenced proceedings against Pfizer following a complaint filed by Ratiopharm alleging that Pfizer’s behaviour in the enforcement of its patent rights amounts to abuse of a dominant position. It is too soon to make comments on this case….
In its 25 June 2010 decision, the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris ruled on the calculation of patent infringement’s damages. The significance of this decision lies in the fact that it explains step by step the reasoning used to calculate the amount of damages awarded to the patentee victim of an infringement.
In Denmark, as is probably the case in many other jurisdictions, in IP proceedings a case must be brought against each alleged infringer in that alleged infringer’s local jurisdiction (bailiff’s department of the local city court). In a recent decision from the Danish High Court (Eastern Division) (case reported in the Danish Legal Gazette UfR…
Like other countries, such as Australia or Germany, a “petty” patent or “utility model” can be obtained in Spain for so-called minor inventions. They present a twofold distinction with regard to “full-fledged” patents, when it comes to examining their patentability: (i) only documents disclosed in Spain form part of the state of the art; (ii)…
According to the so-called “Duesseldorfer Besichtigungspraxis” (Duesseldorf inspection practice), a patent owner who establishes a prevailing likelihood of infringement may secure evidence by inspection of the allegedly infringing device or method by a court-appointed, independent expert. The inspection order is granted in ex-parte proceedings. Contrary to other preliminary injunctions, the required urgency is generally presumed…
The amendments of the Italian IP Code introduced by Legislative Decree no. 131 of 13 August 2010 are many and I tend to believe that there is no Italian IP lawyer who is sure to have already counted them all. Each time I have to consider a new issue for a client, I find some…
It is trite that in most jurisdictions, the grant of a patent is only a negative right, in that it does not give the patentee the right to work the invention, merely to prevent others from doing so. For example, the invention claimed may fall within the scope of a prior ‘master’ patent, of which…
In decision G2/08, available on the EPO website, the Enlarged Board of Appeal provides a problem in relation to the Swiss type claims. It announces the abolition of the use of these claims in point 7.1.4 of the Reasons: “In order to ensure legal certainty and to protect legitimate interests of applicants, the abolition of…
EC Directive 2004/48 (known as the “Enforcement Directive”) was implemented in Spain through Law 19/2006, which sought to harmonise, among other aspects, the criteria to establish damages in legal proceedings involving the infringement of intellectual property rights. In cases of patent infringement where the complainant claims profits lost or damages caused by the defendant, one…
When challenging the validity of a patent, a decision needs to be made early on as to grounds on which to rely. When it comes to allegations of anticipation and obviousness, the challenger and its advisers will need to consider whether to rely or just one or two prior art citations or to include a…
