Beamocular brought proceedings against C-Rad, alleging that Beamocular had the superior right to an Invention made by K.M. who was at the time an employee of C-Rad. The Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeals confirmed that the primary work duties of K.M. did not constitute research activities and therefore the Invention was not a…

In February 2014, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (“MSD”) brought proceedings against Paranova Läkemedel AB (“Paranova”), alleging that Paranova was violating MSD’s right as an exclusive licensee of the European patent EP 0 595 935 (“EP 935”) by taking preparatory measures for parallel importation. MSD applied for a permanent injunction and corrective measures as well…

by Dominic Adair Following an exciting opening ceremony on Sunday evening featuring Brazilian dancers, caipirinha cocktails and black bean soup, the AIPPI’s 2015 World Congress in Rio de Janeiro began in earnest yesterday. The agenda for day 1 started with the customary round of Executive Committee meetings (followed by opportunities for a networking lunch) and…

By Kristian Fredrikson, Dephi and Jan Lindberg, Trust Ltd. This time I want to introduce a fellow author from Sweden, Kristian Fredrikson, who promised to write about this interesting recent decision from the Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen 18 June 2015, case no B6341-13). It does not concern patents per se but an infringer’s liability for…

This time we take a look at various decisions that share one thing in common — piercing the corporate veil doctrine. Even if these rulings are not purely patent law cases, they will definitely have influence on forthcoming litigations. First, let us look at the recent Finnish Supreme Court case 2015:17, in which the defendant…

The Stockholm District Court found that the product did not fall under the wording of the patent claim or the doctrine of equivalence. During the application procedure before EPO, the patent holder had intentionally limited the scope of protection in order to avoid prior art. The features added to the patent claim during the application…

The Stockholm District Court held the Swedish part of a European patent concerning a method of growing two or more plants invalid, due to lack of inventive step. Despite requests for limitations by the proprietor the patent was declared invalid in its entirety. Infringement, exceptions to patentability and prior use rights were also considered by…

In a combined patent infringement and nullity case, the Svea Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Roche Diagnostics’ European patent as far as Sweden was concerned, but held, other than the District Court, that the alleged infringer did not infringe the patent at issue. The Court of Appeal further held that a patent can…

The Swedish Supreme Court held that in cases where the infringing act is the sale of infringing goods, the damage (in this case the right to reasonable compensation for use of the invention and compensation for loss of profit) occurs as of the date a sales agreement is entered into, and the 5-year statute of…