Equivalents

Under the doctrine of equivalents a patentee may raise a claim of infringement even though the allegedly infringing product does not literally fulfil all features of the claim. The purpose of the doctrine is to prevent an infringer from stealing the benefit of an invention by changing minor or insubstantial details while retaining the same functionality. Internationally, the criteria for determining equivalents vary. For example, German courts apply a three-step test known as Schneidmesser’s questions. In the UK, the equivalence doctrine was most recently discussed in Eli Lilly v Actavis UK in July 2017. In the US, the function-way-result test is used.

(Indirect) infringement, Case Law, Equivalents, evidence, Kluwer Patent Cases, Legislation, Litigation, Patents, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Prior art, Procedure, Scope of protection, Sufficiency of disclosure, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/ /1 Comment

As reported in last week’s post, on 20 January 2021 Birss J handed down what may be his last first instance decision before his elevation to the Court of Appeal.  The first post on the judgment considered the issues of identifying the skilled person, insufficiency and infringement.  This second part considers the decision relating to…

(Indirect) infringement, Case Law, Equivalents, evidence, Kluwer Patent Cases, Legislation, Litigation, Patents, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Prior art, Procedure, Scope of protection, Sufficiency of disclosure, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/ /1 Comment

On 20 January 2021 Birss J handed down what may be his last first instance decision before he takes his place in the Court of Appeal.  If that turns out to the case then Illumina Cambridge Limited v Latvia MGI Tech SIA and others is a substantial judgment to mark this departure.  In this case…

Equivalents, Infringement, Litigation, Netherlands, Patents

(Brinkhof)/ /3 Comments

Yesterday, the Dutch prime minister announced the Netherlands will be ‘locked down’ until mid-January. At the same time the author of this blog, part of a six member audience due to COVID restrictions, paid his last visit to the movies for many weeks to come. On the screen Tenet, a mishmash of Sci-Fi wannabe and…

Amendments, Equivalents, Extent of Protection, Infringement, Litigation, Novelty, Patents, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Prior art, Revocation, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/

On 15 October 2020 Meade J. handed down his first ever written judgment in his new role as a Judge of the High Court in MSD v Wyeth. The neutral citation for the case is [2020] EWHC 2636 (Pat) and a link to the judgment is found here. The Judge had heard the case back…

Equivalents, Patents

(Clifford Chance)/

In Odiorne v. Winkley (1814), Harvard professor Joseph Story, then sitting as a Judge at a Circuit Court of the District of Massacusetts, upon being called to decide whether a machine infringed a patent wrote, in the context of that case, that “The material question, therefore, is not whether the same elements of motion, or…

Case Law, Equivalents, Infringement, Inventive step, Kluwer Patent Cases, Litigation, Patents, Prior art, Prior use right, Revocation, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/ /2 Comments

A further interesting decision handed down by the Judges of the English Patents Court prior to the Easter break was a judgment from Nugee J concerning proceedings between E. Mishan and Hozelock relating to a UK patent and European patent, both entitled “Expandable Hose Assembly”. E. Mishan (trading as Emson) claimed that Hozelock’s expandable garden…

Case Law, EPC, Equivalents, Infringement, Litigation, Priority right, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/

On 10 October 2018 the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the matter of Icescape Limited v Ice-World International BV & Ors*. Three discrete issues were considered by the Court and, although the decision of the Lord Justices of Appeal ultimately did not change the effect of the first instance judgment, the opinions…

Equivalents, Extent of Protection, Infringement, Litigation, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Scope of protection, United Kingdom

(Bristows)/ /3 Comments

On 12 July 2017, the UK Supreme Court handed down a ruling which caused a shockwave to resound across the UK patent community. For more than a decade, when addressing the issue of the construction and infringement of a patent, every practitioner would have focussed on the question prescribed by Lord Hoffmann in Kirin Amgen:…

EPC, EPO, Equivalents, Inventive step, Litigation, Novelty, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Prior art, Revocation, Second Medical Use, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/

Patent lawyers in the UK have spent the last three months pondering, debating and at times indulging in an element of despair (to put it mildly) about what might be the impact of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 48 on issues of validity (see here). Today they…