Mr X was ordered to pay damages for the infringement of a French patent No. 87‑03865, relating to a massage device, by a decision of the Cour d’Appel of Limoges on 10 September 2001. In the absence of an appeal on a point of law, this decision became irrevocable. However, in a separate action, the same patent was subsequently…

Merck Sharp Dohme Corp. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Teva Pharma B.V. and Teva UK limited On 15 March 2012, the High Court in England and Wales delivered some useful guidance on when a patentee can obtain an interim injunction in a pharmaceutical patent infringement action. The case was Merck Sharp Dohme Corp. and…

Last April we reported the case of Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Schering Pharma AG [2011] EWHC 583 (Pat), concerning immediate release formulations of a combination contraceptive product containing the steroidal hormones drospirenone and ethinylestradiol. We can now report the decision of the Court of Appeal in this case (handed down on 7 March 2012)…

On the defendant’s side, knowing what the patent dispute is all about is essential for your strategy. Not only do you need to adjust your non-infringement arguments to the plaintiff’s assertions concerning how the features of the claim are fulfilled in the attacked embodiment. Even more importantly, the scope of an infringement verdict is determined…

An article in the well-known IP magazine GRUR last year carried the heading “Do exhibitors at trade fairs in Germany enjoy immunity from the courts?” The author came to the conclusion that this question had to be answered in the affirmative after he had read the Federal Court of Justice decision “Pralinenform II” (a trademark…

In recent years, the Commercial Courts of Barcelona have been called on to decide whether a claim depicting a Markush formula that did not show the stereochemistry of the compound protects only the racemate or also its enantiomers. The debate emerged in the context of an application for a preliminary injunction filed by Novartis based…

On March 20, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., holding that Prometheus’ claims directed to methods of optimizing the dose of specific drugs used in the treatment of specific conditions are invalid under 35 USC § 101 because they impermissibly claim laws of nature….

by Rüdiger Pansch for rospatt osten pross An interesting paper comes with the case management directions of the Munich District Court after the complaint is served upon defendants. It titles “The new AGB of the Patent Chambers” while AGB stands for “Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen” meaning General Terms and Conditions, i.e. fixed terms that one party of…