Where a substance or composition is already known to have been used in a ‘first medical use’, it may still be patentable for any second or further use, provided that said use is novel and inventive. This is an exception from the general principle that product claims can only be obtained for (absolutely) novel products. ‘Second Medical Use’ patents are an important component of the potential second-line patent protection.
On 4 March 2019, we uploaded a post noting that the English Patents Court had decided to refer a question to the CJEU on whether it was permissible for a patentee to rely on a third party’s MA to obtain an SPC in the absence of consent from that third party. We briefly summarised the…
On Friday 1 March 2019, Arnold J handed down his judgment in the patent dispute between Eli Lilly and Genentech regarding IL-17A/F antibodies*1. This lengthy judgment, which as the Judge observed: “was one of most complex patent cases I have ever tried”, is littered with interesting legal points. However, to many life sciences patent lawyers,…
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…
Patent lawyers in the UK have spent the last three months pondering, debating and at times indulging in an element of despair (to put it mildly) about what might be the impact of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 48 on issues of validity (see here). Today they…
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,…
The sunrise session of day 2 was on second medical use claims and the hot European topic of plausibility. Floyd LJ began with a potted history and explained that whereas plausibility can be raised in different invalidity contexts the overall point is that the scope of the claim needs to be justified by the technical…
Sincere thanks to all readers who completed the Christmas Quiz and congratulations to Katerina Schneiderova who, along with 4 others, answered 9 questions correctly. Katerina – the Kluwer team will be sending a prize to you shortly. The correct answers are here. Regarding Question 11 – What is the best analysis of the construction of Swiss-type…
by Steven Willis Yesterday, the Patents Court handed down yet another decision in the Sisyphean pregablin litigation, this time refusing Sandoz’ application to vary the Order for Injunction which resulted from Arnold J’s October 2015 decision (“Sandoz I”) to injunct Sandoz following its launch of a full label pregabalin product (“Pregabalin Sandoz”). As is typically…
The festive season is almost upon us once again. Since many British and other European folk (not to mention our American cousins) are feeling somewhat exhausted by the political upheavals that 2016 has brought with it, the Kluwer patents team thought that there could be few better ways to take one’s mind off the current turmoil…
On 21 October 2016, the Federal Court of Australia handed down its judgment in the case of Apotex Pty Ltd v Warner-Lambert Company LLC (No 2) [2016] FCA 1238 (FCA Judgment). Justice John Nicholas found in favour of Warner-Lambert, both upholding the validity of its patent claims and granting final injunctions restraining infringement by Apotex….
