On 12 February 2019, the influential Barcelona Court of Appeal (Section 15) issued an interesting judgment clarifying the role played by a patent’s drawings for the purpose of interpreting the scope of protection of the claims. This judgment has reversed a previous first instance decision which, according to the Court of Appeal, unduly relied on…

The holder of a standard essential patent (SEP) should first notify the alleged infringer of the SEP, following which the alleged infringer should inform the patent holder of its willingness to take a licence. Then, said licence needs to be offered on FRAND terms. These steps are guidelines for good faith negotiations between the parties….

Regulatory Data Protection (RDP) issues are dealt with only by the Licensing Regulation of the Ministry of Health (MOH) of Turkey. In principle the relevant provision grants protection of data of originators for a term of 6 years as of the date of first Marketing Authorisation granted in the EU. However there is no mechanism…

The case at hand concerned an application by Pfizer for Arrow-declarations in relation to its proposed launch of its bevacizumab product (it will be branded “Zirabev”) for the treatment of various cancers in combination with other drugs. Since Pfizer was unable to show a “useful purpose”, the complaint was dismissed. The mere prospect of using…

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…

Among the flurry of pre-summer vacation judgments coming from the Patents Court is one from Mr Justice Birss (17 July 2019), concerning the validity of Hoffman-La Roche’s patent EP (UK) 2 007 809. EP’809 is a formulation patent for the monoclonal antibody vedolizumab, marketed as Entyvio® and used to treat ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease….

The scope of a patent is to be interpreted according to Art. 69 EPC and the Protocol. If the literal text is limiting, the question is how the skilled person would understand this limitation. If the limiting wording is due to a technical consideration, the limitation may be considered differently from when the limitation can…

A patent that is limited during the course of the proceedings (even after the pleadings) is held to have been so limited ab initio if the limitation is duly registered. When a European patent is granted and validated, an existing national patent loses its effect only for the invention claimed in the European patent. The…

The Court held that a selection invention is inventive if the compound of the selection offers surprisingly advantageous or improved properties over the prior art compounds. These properties should already be plausible from the patent application as filed. Further, a selection invention would be obvious to the skilled person if they would assume a neutral…