Read all the (latest) blogs from:
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, EPC, Estonia, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States of America
As we are approaching the holiday season, Sweden has a special gift for SPC applicants and proprietors. This comes in the wake of the recent decision PMÄ 7804-24 of November 11, 2024, in which the Swedish Patent and Market Court endorsed a change of practice regarding the manner in which the SPC term is calculated….
The 2015 landmark decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Huawei/ZTE established a balanced framework for licensing standard essential patents (SEPs), striking a compromise between the interests of SEPs holders and implementers. The ruling notoriously clarified when SEP holders can seek injunctions without abusing their dominant market position. It stated…
In a decision rendered on 12 June 2024, the full chamber of the private law division (‘Segunda Seção’) of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice ruled that state courts may decide on the validity of patents when the validity is put in issue by way of defence in civil proceedings for infringement (EREsp 1.332.417/RS). The…
A case concerning an automated vinification system offers us a glimpse of that rare species of patent litigation: the declaratory non-infringement action. The case demonstrates the need to carefully draft this type of action, as well as the need to choose the right evidence to support declarations that go beyond specific models. This is key…
UPC 252/2023 NanoString v Harvard ACT_551180/2023 (UPC_CFI_252/2023) The UPC’s Munich Central Division has recently issued its decision revoking Harvard’s EP 2794928 B1 (“the Patent”) in DE, NL, and FR, with other EPO member states likely excluded from the decision on commercial grounds having lapsed during opposition proceedings in 2019. The decision is appealable. The NanoString decision…
After Novartis had obtained a preliminary injunction against Pharmathen, it observed that there were still infringing acts being performed. In the first instance, the provisions judge sided with Novartis and ordered that Pharmathen had to pay EUR 7,500,000 as a penalty. On appeal Pharmathen tried to reverse this verdict, but its efforts were in vain….
On 8 October 2024, Mr Justice Meade handed down judgment in BioNTech SE and Pfizer Inc., (together, BioNTech/Pfizer) v CureVac SE. Meade J found CureVac’s patents, relating to split poly(A) tails in mRNA, invalid for obviousness and insufficiency due to (i) lack of plausibility and (ii) because the purported technical effect does not in fact…
The king is dead! Long live the king! An expression traditionally uttered at the death of a monarch to acclaim a new king on the death of his predecessor. Could it be applied to our traditional French saisie-contrefaçon at the advent of saisie-contrefaçon before the UPC? This question came to mind last week during a…
On 18 September 2024, the Honourable Justice Jackman, in his capacity as a Deputy President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), granted Sandoz a licence pursuant to section 223(9) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) (Act). In doing so, his Honour set aside an earlier, 2019 decision, in which the Commissioner of Patents (Commissioner) had also…
Brazil is an increasingly relevant venue for litigation involving standard essential patents (SEPs). As a top-5 market in the world for consumer electronics and the most performing economy in Latin America, Brazil is indeed an important country for players in tech. Think of X (formerly “Twitter”), which has recently been banned in Brazil for failing…
