The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) allowed review of the conduct of the Technical Board of Appeal (TBA), since the TBA rejected a main request for lack of inventive step which had not yet been discussed during oral proceedings. The EBA decided that the petitioner had no reason to assume that the TBA would decide…
AstraZeneca filed a request with the Patent Office (PO) for the publication in the PO’s official bullet of a court judgment invalidating a previous PO’s decision regarding the termination of one of AstraZeneca’s patents. The PO denied AstraZeneca’s request for publication due to a pending procedure for the issuance of a supplementary protection certificate (SPC)…
The question of whether or not a claim in a patent deriving from a divisional application covering or embracing something which was not specifically disclosed in the parent application, is not the proper standard for determining whether there has been an inadmissible extension of subject-matter. Although broadening of individual features is not prohibited by Art….
The Enlarged Board confirmed that a Technical Board of Appeal may refuse a request that is filed with the grounds of opposition if – upon request by the opposition division – the applicant has declined to file such a request during first instance proceedings and there is no reason why such request could not have…
The general rule in UK litigation is that the successful party is entitled to its costs. One exception to this rule, peculiar to patent cases, is a so-called ‘Earth Closet’ order. If an alleged infringer introduces a new piece of prior art, after service of its original Grounds of Invalidity, an Earth Closet order enables…
The Court of Justice clarified the requirements for grant of an SPC under Articles 3(a) and 3(b) of the SPC Regulation. According to the Court, on the basis of Article 3(a) an SPC cannot be granted for active ingredients not specified in the wording of the claims of the basic patent. With reference to Article…
The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal , dismissing a revocation action against the patent in suit, which protected the calcium salt of atorvastatin. The Supreme court held that (i) the Bolar provision does not apply with retrospective effect, because its origin and rationale is different from the Experimental Use Exception; and (ii.) an invention that…
The UK Supreme Court overturned the decision of the High Court and the Court of Appeal that HGS’s patent directed towards Neutrokine, a new protein and member of the ligand superfamily, lacked industrial applicability. Click here for the full text of this case. A summary of this case will be posted on http://www.KluwerIPCases.com.
The Supreme Court held that disputes relating to confidential information contained in an expert’s report, filed in the framework of descriptive seizure proceedings, can be heard by the court having granted leave for these proceedings. Such disputes do not have to be adjourned until the proceedings on the merits. Click here for the full text of this…
The Court of Appeal dismissed Krka’s appeal against a decision of the Oslo Court of Enforcement and Execution, which granted AstraZeneca a preliminary injunction preventing Krka from marketing its generic esomeprazole product in Norway. The Court of Appeal held that the esomeprazole salt in Krka’s generic product with an optical purity of 98,8-99,4% was “an…
