(Indirect) infringement

Infringement is unauthorized application of the claimed invention, e.g. by trading in a product that falls within the scope of the claims of a patent. Actively inducing, encouraging or materially contributing to the infringing activity may – in some jurisdictions – also constitute indirect infringement. Infringement by inducement and contributory infringement are two types of indirect patent infringement, recognized in the U.S. In Europe indirect infringement generally relates to the (offer to) supply a means essential to the invention.

(Indirect) infringement, EPC, Equivalents, Extent of Protection, France, Italy, Scope of protection, Spain, United Kingdom

(Bristows)/ /3 Comments

By Gregory Bacon Yes, you read that right. Thirteen years after the House of Lords had firmly shut the door on any notion of a doctrine extending the scope of patent protection outside the claims, the UK Supreme Court in yesterday’s judgment in Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 48 reversed gear and reintroduced a…

(Indirect) infringement, Netherlands, Pharma, Second Medical Use

(Brinkhof)/

Second medical use cases have been making their way through patent courts around the world. In the Novartis / Sun litigation the Hague Court of Appeal (PI decision) and District Court (interlocutory merits decision) already provided their thoughts on indirect infringement in 2015. The Court of Appeal concluded that Sun did indirectly infringe Novartis’ patent,…

(Compulsory) license, (Indirect) infringement, China, SEP

(Baker & McKenzie), (Baker & McKenzie FenXun (FTZ)), and (ZY Partners)/

On March 22, 2017, the Beijing IP Court (the “trial court”) issued a decision on a high-profile case Iwncomm v. Sony concerning infringement of a standard essential patent (SEP). This case has drawn extensive attention in China’s IP community because it is the first SEP-based injunction granted by a Chinese court, and it involves quite…

(Indirect) infringement, Added matter, Amendments, Electrical Engineering, United Kingdom

(Bristows)/

by Naomi Hazenberg and Olivia Henry The Court of Appeal has handed down judgment in IPCom v HTC ([2017] EWCA Civ 90), the latest instalment of the long running UK litigation on European Patent (UK) 1 841 268. Floyd LJ, writing the leading judgment, allowed IPCom’s appeal and dismissed HTC’s cross-appeal finding the patent (as…

(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…

(Indirect) infringement, Equivalents, Italy, Pharma, Validity

(Trevisan & Cuonzo)/

By decision no. 1651 of 14 October 2016 (publication reference: 24658/2016), the Italian Supreme Court put an end to the longstanding litigation between Bayer and the Italian company Industriale Chimica in relation to the production of drospirenone. This decision tackles both the issue of the patentability of chemical intermediates and that of infringement by equivalents….

(Indirect) infringement, Italy, UPC

(Trevisan & Cuonzo)/

On 25 November 2016 Italy’s ratification law of the UPC Agreement was published in the Official Gazette of the Italian Republic (Law no. 214 of 3 November 2016 – link to the Official Gazette here). The ratification law – which definitely puts an end to the hostility initially shown by the Italian government to the UPC…

(Indirect) infringement, Pharma, Procedure, Revocation, Second Medical Use, Sufficiency of disclosure, United Kingdom, Validity

, , (Bristows)/

Media attention at the English High Court today may have been focussed on the Article 50 challenge but for many patent lawyers operating in the life sciences sector, of equal or greater importance was the handing down of the long-awaited judgment in the Lyrica appeal. To recap briefly, Pfizer was the owner of a patent…

(Indirect) infringement, Netherlands, Pharma, Priority right, Second Medical Use

(Brinkhof)/

In 2010 the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal took the badge of Swiss type claims from patentees (G 02/08), and since then they cannot use it anymore. Six years later two cases on (infringement of) Swiss type / second medical use claims are knockin’ on the Dutch Supreme Court’s door. While the Enlarged Board put…

(Indirect) infringement, Germany, NPE, Procedure

(Rospatt Osten Pross)/

There has been some confusion in Germany as to whether exhibiting products and services on a trade show qualifies as an infringing act or not. Most prominently, two decisions of the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) have denied a general rule that any presentation of goods or services on a trade show justifies…