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
On December 23, the Brussels Enterprises Court issued a significant judgment confirming that Samsung Bioepis’ notification complies with the legal requirements for relying on the SPC Manufacturing Waiver for export purposes, dismissing claims brought by Amgen on multiple fronts (Dutch language judgment here and English machine translation here). It is the first judgment on the…
In July 2023, the Japanese electronics company Panasonic initiated a series of patent infringement and FRAND-related proceedings against several subsidiaries of the Chinese consumer electronics maker Oppo (and in parallel against another Chinese company, i.e. Xiaomi), at the local divisions of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in Mannheim and Munich (*). Panasonic’s suit targeted Oppo…
On 30 October 2024, the District Court of the Hague handed down two merits decisions on the widely litigated apixaban patent of Bristol-Myers Squibb (see here and here – Dutch language versions). EP 1 427 415 B1 (EP 415), which lapsed in 2022, and the corresponding supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) have been subject to litigation…
The eagerly awaited CJEU decision on the two joined referrals Teva v. MSD (C-119/22) and MSD v. Clonmel (C-149/22) relating to SPCs for combination products was handed down today on December 19, 2024. The two referrals arose from national litigation involving SPCs for a combination of active ingredients, i.e., the combination of sitagliptin and metformin…
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….
