Case Law

Case Law, Pharma, United Kingdom

(Bristows)/

The Court of Appeal dismissed Boehringer Ingelheim’s application for permission to appeal the first instance Patents Court decision that EP (UK) 1,379,220 lacked inventive step.  The Court of Appeal also considered and overturned the existing judicial guidance on granting permission to appeal in patent matters. A full summary of this case has been published on…

Case Law, Germany

(Krieger Mes Graf & v. der Groeben)/

In this case the FCJ considered the question of when the enforcement of a judgment in an infringement action should be suspended in light of a decision of the Federal Patent Court in a parallel nullity action concerning the same patent. The Court held that there is no reason for a suspension if the patent…

Bulgaria, Case Law

(Delchev & Partners)/

The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court upheld a first instance judgment annulling the decision of the Bulgarian Patent Office to refuse the grant of a supplementary protection certificate for a medical product where the active ingredient was functionally defined in the patent claims rather than through its structural formula. A full summary of this case has…

Case Law, Entitlement, Germany

(Rospatt Osten Pross)/

by Bernward Zollner for rospatt osten pross In a recent decision of 10 January 2017 (BGH X ZR 17/13) concerning a “Restitutionsklage” against a final patent infringement judgement of the Appeal Court Düsseldorf the German “Bundesgerichtshof” has broadened the scope of the doctrine which the court has developed under the heading “Crimp-Werkzeug”. This doctrine was…

Case Law, Pharma, United States of America

(Wolters Kluwer Legal & Regulatory US)/

Pharmaceuticals company Watson’s proposed generic version of competitor Shire’s brand-name mesalamine LIALDA® did not satisfy the requirements for a Markush group claimed by a Shire patent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. A compound contained in the ANDA product—which was not present in the patent claim’s Markush group—structurally and functionally…

Case Law, Portugal

(University of Coimbra)/

Provisional measures, notably the interlocutory injunction provided for by Article 338-I of the Portuguese Code of Industrial Property, do not extend to the provisional protection of a European patent, nor to a national patent the translation of which is not yet published, because there is an insufficent degree of fumus boni iuris as the protection…

Case Law, Lithuania

(METIDA Law Firm)/

In relation to a dispute concerning the novelty of one invention, the Court held that testing a new product in a special laboratory under contract is not public as such. The testing process and its results are not usually available to third parties, so it cannot be equated to disclosure of information about the product…

Case Law, Lithuania

(METIDA Law Firm)/

The court upheld the decision that the patent applications in question had been appropriately considered and that the examiner had established that there were formal reasons for refusing the patent applications.  It also ruled that since the patent applications had been refused solely on formal grounds, the Plaintiff still had the right to file those…

(Indirect) infringement, Case Law, CJEU, Damages

(Clifford Chance)/

On 25 January 2017, the CJEU handed down a very interesting judgment in case C-367/15, concluding that Article 13 of Directive EC 2004/48 (better known as “the Enforcement Directive”) does not prevent a national regulation from stating that when an intellectual property right (“IPR”) has been infringed, the IPR owner may claim an amount corresponding…

Case Law, Germany

(Krieger Mes Graf & v. der Groeben)/

In this case the FCJ expanded on earlier case law regarding claim construction, in particular how a term used in the claim language should be interpreted in light of the specification and the entire set of claims. The Court held that the subject matter of the main claim can generally not be limited by a…