Actions which impinge upon the monopoly granted by an Intellectual Property right are considered infringements.
… that is the question in recent ‘Dutch discovery’ proceedings in a patent dispute between beer giants Anheuser-Busch Inbev (‘ABI’) and Heineken. Well, sort of: the legal question was if ABI would be granted access to documentation seized at Heineken’s premises in the Netherlands. The Hague Court’s Preliminary Measures Judge’s answer did all but refresh…
The Constitutional Court held that the 30-day period to initiate mandatory arbitration proceedings against applicants for authorization to introduce generic medicines onto the market is a final (or expiration) term. Case date: 10 April 2018 Case number: 187/2018, 41/2017 Court: Constitutional Court of Portugal A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP…
It seems to be a more and more realistic scenario that the UK may leave the European Union on March 29, 2019 without an agreement. A lot has been written about the effect of such a “hard Brexit” on trade in general and –more interesting to us working in the patent field- on the future…
The Finnish Supreme Court resolved in February 2019 on the matter of whether or not the preconditions for precautionary measures were at hand in a patent law infringement case. Firstly, the Court interpreted the Act regarding Preservation of Evidence in Civil Cases Concerning Intellectual Property Rights (344/2000, as amended). Moreover, the Court analysed the information…
The German Federal Supreme Court has decided on what is necessary to establish a legal interest in a declaratory judgment of non-infringement under German law. The Supreme Court’s decision, which we will discuss in this post, is available in German (X ZR 62/16 – “Slug Bait”). The case concerned the declaration of non-infringement (“DNI”) of…
On 1 February 2019, the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court granted an injunction against Mylan AB’s sale of the product Tadalafil »Mylan« containing 5 mg tadalafil in Denmark. On 7 September 2018, Eli Lilly Danmark A/S (“Eli Lilly”) brought a case to the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court requesting a preliminary injunction against Mylan AB…
A district court erred in granting summary judgment to the defending provider on the grounds that the asserted claims were invalid for lack of written description and were not infringed by the provider’s system. Case date: 14 February 2019 Case number: No. 17-2510 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit A full summary of this…
The Supreme People’s Court of China recently issued a new judicial interpretation regarding preliminary injunctions (PI) for intellectual property (IP) disputes that took effect on January 1, 2019, officially titled “Provisions of The Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Laws in Adjudication of Action Preservation Cases Involving IP Disputes” (Provisions). The…
The same claims a jury found mobile carrier Sprint liable of infringing were later held invalid under Section 101 by the Federal Circuit in an appeal brought by cell provider T-Mobile. The judgment against Sprint had not been made final. Case date: 01 February 2019 Case number: No. 2018-1108 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit…
AstraZeneca tried to enjoin Hexal from marketing its Fulvestrant-medicament in main proceedings (after already having failed in PI-proceedings) due to alleged patent infringement of AstraZeneca’s Swiss-type claim patent. The Dusseldorf Court of Appeal, however, dismissed the appeal (docket-no I-2 U 29/18). To understand the implications of this case, one has to first step back and…
