Pharma, an abbreviation commonly used for the pharmaceutical industry, discovers, develops, produces and markets drugs or pharmaceutical drugs for use as medication. Pharma depends heavily on patents to protect its inventions worldwide, as well as on Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs). Pharmaceutical companies are subject to laws and regulations that govern the patenting, testing, safety, efficacy and marketing of drugs. Pharma includes production of generic medicines. Pharma may also refer to (patent) litigation related to pharmaceutical products.
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. was unable to show that patents licensed to Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. covering its testosterone gel product Fortesta® were invalid as obvious in light of prior art, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Therefore, a district court ruling finding that the patents were not obvious was affirmed…
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…
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…
On 9 September 2016, the Full Federal Court of Australia delivered its judgment in Actavis Pty Ltd v Orion Corporation [2016] FCAFC 121 (Actavis). The proceedings concerned the infringement/revocation of a patent for Stalevo, Novartis’ 3-in-1 Parkinson’s disease drug. A related issue was whether Novartis Pharma AG (Novartis) was the exclusive licensee of Orion’s 765932…
When it comes to infringement of patents, the doctrine of equivalence has gained some more attention in the last few years in German courts and indeed also in some of my earlier posts on this blog (see here). In this context, two decisions of the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) in 2011 have set up…
The end of July traditionally brings a flurry of patents judgments from the English Courts. This year was no exception, hence the large number of posts in the last few days. Among this year’s flurry was a decision handed down by the Court of Appeal on 27 July 2016 in Hospira v Genentech ([2016] EWCA…
by Rachel Mumby Those readers who are unfamiliar with the excessively optimistic outlook of Mr Wilkins Micawber in Charles Dicken’s novel David Copperfield, would be forgiven for having had to look up the word “Micawberism” on reading it in the judgment of Floyd J (as he then was) in Blacklight Power Inc. v The Comptroller-General…
Claim construction and scope of protection are perhaps the most hotly contested topics in Dutch patent law. Over the last ten years, we have had no less than six Supreme Court decisions dealing with these matters. The latest development in this continuing saga is the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bayer / Sandoz, which offers…
On 29 April 2016, the Australian Productivity Commission published a Draft Report on its enquiry into Australia’s Intellectual Property Arrangements. Although the Draft Report provides separate analyses on the state of copyright, patents, designs and trade marks, it arrives at a common conclusion: Aussie IP needs work. “Not as effective as they could be” The…
by Rachel Mumby Bexsero, the Meningitis B vaccine marketed by GSK, has been the subject of many newspaper headlines in the UK over the last year, with parents seeking to persuade the UK Government to offer the vaccine to all children under the age of 11 as a matter of routine. Few will have been…
