On 5 July 2019, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) handed down its judgment in the appeal and cross-appeal in Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2019] FCAFC 115.  The judgment considers in-depth the extent to which a patentee can: prevent those who have acquired title to a patented…

The Court of Appeal, overturning Birss J’s decision, decided that in the case of TQ Delta v ZyXEL, the answer was no. The facts of the case leading to this decision are somewhat unusual. TQ Delta asserted infringement of two patents declared essential to ITU-T standards. Following a trial in respect of liability, one of…

Pemetrexed, yet again: last Wednesday the District Court of The Hague, swimming against the current and after a deep dive in the prosecution file, decided that Fresenius did not infringe Eli Lilly’s ‘pemetrexed disodium’ patent with a generic product that does not contain pemetrexed disodium, not even by equivalence. The basic facts of the widespread…

The Court held that the defendant had infringed the claimant’s patent for the removal of suspended particles and removal of boron from the polluted waters, through its installation of recycling systems of semi-clean (grey) water in several premises and had failed to compensate the claimant financially for the use without his consent. Case date: 25…

Russian law provides that information on state registration of drugs shall be publicly available. For a long period, MoH used to turn a blind eye to this obligation, keeping information on all filed applications confidential. Absence of this information used to pose additional risks for patent holders lacking information on the upcoming launches of generic…

A further interesting decision handed down by the Judges of the English Patents Court prior to the Easter break was a judgment from Nugee J concerning proceedings between E. Mishan and Hozelock relating to a UK patent and European patent, both entitled “Expandable Hose Assembly”. E. Mishan (trading as Emson) claimed that Hozelock’s expandable garden…

In a patent infringement suit brought by Omega Patents against CalAmp Corp. alleging infringement of Omega’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,346,876 (’876 patent), 6,756,885 (’885 patent), 7,671,727 (’727 patent), and 8,032,278 (’278 patent), the federal district court in Orlando’s judgment of no invalidity of the asserted claims was affirmed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the…

A recently published Decision of 9 November 2018 from Barcelona Commercial Court number 5 sheds some light on the indicia that may or may not be sufficient for the purposes of ordering a preliminary injunction “ex parte”. For the readers’ benefit, it will be useful to clarify that under Spanish law, one of the requirements…