Scope of protection

(Indirect) infringement, Chemical Engineering, Extent of Protection, Inventive step, Netherlands, Revocation, Scope of protection, Validity

(Brinkhof)/

In these infringement proceedings before the Preliminary Relief Judge of the District Court of The Hague the defendant argued that the claimants should not have received an SPC for valaciclovir, since not valaciclovir, but its parent drug aciclovir is the ‘active ingredient’ Because aciclovir is not protected by the basic patent, and the market authorization…

Bulgaria, Case Law, Chemical Engineering, Extent of Protection, Scope of protection

(Delchev & Partners)/

The Bulgarian Patent Office (BPO) revoked patent BG 61365 and published an announcement of the revocation in its official bulletin. The revocation was appealed by AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LR. The Court held the decision of the BPO invalid and annulled it as the decision was not in written form and the mere publication in the official…

Case Law, Chemical Engineering, Extent of Protection, Netherlands, Scope of protection

(Brinkhof)/

The Administrative Law Division of the Council of State holds that the District Court has rightfully found that the Patent Office was not obligated to issue a Supplementary Protection Certificate for the medicinal product cetuximab. Article 73 (1) of the Dutch Patents Act 1995 on indirect infringement, does not in all circumstances protect the patentee…

Amendments, Case Law, Extent of Protection, Germany, Mechanical Engineering, Scope of protection

/

The Federal Court of Justice ruled that the subject matter of a patent does not extend beyond the content of the application as filed when terms are used in the claims that are not literally used in the application text but are summarizing words for longer descriptions in the application as filed. A full summary…

Biologics, Case Law, Extent of Protection, Scope of protection, United Kingdom

(Bristows)/

The Court of Appeal has overturned the High Court’s finding of non-infringement, holding Napp’s divisional patents, relating to controlled release formulations of a painkiller called oxycodone, to be valid and infringed by Ratiopharm’s and Sandoz’s ‘Cimex’ product. The Court of Appeal’s finding of infringement contrasts with decisions in Germany where the German designation of the…