Competence of the Dutch courts is determined solely based on facts furnished by plaintiff. Jurisdiction for patent entitlement claims is governed by the Protocol on Recognition to the EPC, not by the Brussels I Regulation. A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.
Conflicts between patents and generic medicaments are mandatorily solved by arbitration. Requests of authorization to introduce generic medicaments in the market (AIM) are published by the Portuguese Medicaments Office (INFARMED) and interested parties have a term of 30 days to oppose their industrial property rights. Upon the termination of the term, patents cannot be enforced…
The statute which provides that holders of industrial property rights can resort only to arbitration instead of directly resorting to state courts concerning provisional or interim measures (Article 2 of Law No 62/2011 of 12 December) is not contrary to the Portuguese constitution. However, the statute according to which a patent cannot be enforced against…
When defining the technical problem underlying an invention, it may not simply be assumed that the person skilled in the art needed to address a particular problem. On the contrary, the technical problem must be formulated so generally and neutrally that the question as to which incentives a person skilled in the art obtained from…
(a) Advantages of the invention that have only become evident once the invention was made, and at which therefore the skilled person would not have directed his efforts to further develop the state of the art, may not be used to define the technical problem underlying the invention (the Aufgabe of the invention). (b) Depending…
In its decision 24 April 2015, the Borgarting Court of Appeal upheld a decision from the Oslo District Court revoking Genentech’s Norwegian patent NO 323 557 (the ‘557-patent) which concerns formulations of pharmaceutical proteins, including trastuzumab. Trastuzumab is the active ingredient in Genentech’s product Herceptin. Hospira successfully argued that the disputed claims of the ‘557-patent…
Both parties’ patents in dispute relate to chemical compounds that are appropriate for use in pharmaceutical drugs, in particular for the treatment of flaviviridae infections such as hepatitis C virus infections. Ruling that Idenix’ patent lacks a sufficiently clear description, and that Gilead’s patent is novel and inventive, the Oslo District Court declared Idenix’ patent…
An EPO board held that observations filed by third parties during inter parte appeal must be disregarded by the board, unless they concern amendments during opposition or appeal, in which case the board had discretion whether or not to consider the observations in the examination of the amendments. Also when a party to the appeal…
In this judgment the Court of Appeals Düsseldorf held that the manifest preparation of a product for a specific use which is covered by a use claim can be seen in information on the packaging and in the patient information provided with the pharmaceutical product to the end user. It confirms earlier case law in…
A patent applicant is not obliged to prove the industrial applicability of an invention. It is the Patent Office which must prove the lack thereof. A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.
