Validity

In most systems, a patent is valid for 20 years from the filing date of the patent application. Patents are granted with a presumption of validity but no patent is safe from being challenged and declared (partially) invalid by national courts or, in the case of European patents, revoked by the European Patent Office. Often, a claim of invalidity of a patent is a reaction to an action of the patentee, in particular an infringement action.

(Indirect) infringement, EPC, Infringement, Injunction, Technology, Unitary Patent, UPC, Validity

(Bristows)/

On 27 August 2024, the Munich Local Division awarded a preliminary injunction (‘PI’) in an action brought by Hand Held Products against Scandit for infringement of EP3866051 (“Mobile computer configured to read multiple decodable indicia”) in relation to Scandit’s ‘Data Capture SDK’ software (Order UPC_CFI_74/2024). The Court held that Scandit’s software development kit (SDK) more…

EPC, EPC, EPO, Opposition, Patents, Procedure, Validity

/ /2 Comments

This is part II of an open letter directed to the President of the EPO in his capacity to give directions on the composition of Opposition Divisions. Article 19 EPC explicitly permits the Primary Examiner to be member of an Opposition Division. Many applicants and representatives, however, have a feeling of bias in favour of…

Case Law, European Union, Infringement, UPC, Validity

(Hoffmann Eitle)/

In a long awaited, but timely decision the Düsseldorf local division has the honour to be the first to decide an infringement case before the UPC. Indeed, the court lived up to its promise to deliver a decision in about 1 year. The decision itself, where the patent was found invalid, but an auxiliary request…

Inventive step, Patents, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, Priority right, Spain, Sufficiency of disclosure, Validity

(Clifford Chance)/ /2 Comments

This morning, the Barcelona Appeal Court has announced a judgment of 18 July 2024, reversing the judgment of 15 January 2024 from Commercial Court number 4 of Barcelona, which had found patent EP 1,427,415 (“EP ‘415”), protecting apixaban, to be invalid. The main highlights of the decision may be summarized as follows: The first interesting…

Biologics, Case Law, Covid-19, Damages, Infringement, Inventive step, Patents, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/ /1 Comment

Moderna secured a double victory in the Patents Court last week (2 July 2024) in proceedings against Pfizer and BioNTech.  In the first decision, Meade J found its modified mRNA patent to be valid and infringed by Pfizer and BioNTech’s “Comirnaty” vaccine.  In the second decision, Richards J rejected Pfizer and BioNTech’s defence based on…

Case Law, evidence, Infringement, Inventive step, Novelty, Patents, Pharmaceutical patent, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/

In his Abbott v Dexcom ([2024] EWHC 1664 (Pat)) judgment, published on 28 June 2024, Mr Justice Mellor was faced with the rather unenviable task of determining the approach of the Skilled Team when “due to their differing experiences and expertise” it was unclear if any of the experts were in a position to comment…

Case Law, EPC, Patents, UPC, Validity

, (Hoffmann Eitle)/ /15 Comments

Following months of speculation, EPO Board of Appeal 3.2.01 yesterday issued decision T 439/22 referring questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal on the extent to which the description and drawings should be used in claim interpretation.   The claim feature at issue was: “in which the aerosol-forming substrate comprises a gathered sheet”. The key…

Equivalents, Infringement, Inventive step, Litigation, Novelty, Patents, Pharma, United Kingdom, Validity

(Bristows)/ /2 Comments

Advanced Cell Diagnostics v Molecular Instruments [2024] EWHC 898 (Pat) On 23 April 2024, Mr Justice Meade handed down his judgment in the dispute between Advanced Cell Diagnostics (ACD) and Molecular Instruments (MI). ACD is the proprietor of two European patents which relate to in situ detection of nucleic acids in single cells.  EP (UK)…

Inventive step, Patents, Procedure, United Kingdom, Validity

, (Bristows)/ /1 Comment

Introduction It is common for parties to English patent litigation to settle their differences after the first instance judgment on the merits from the Court.  This is for several reasons including the thoroughness of the Patents Court Judges, the Court of Appeal’s approach to issues such as obviousness (where only an error of principle will…

Case Law, CJEU, Infringement, Injunction, Pharma, Pharmaceutical patent, SPC, Switzerland, Validity

(MLL Legal Ltd.)/

From the potpourri of decisions that the Swiss Federal Supreme Court handed down last year, I have selected one in subjective hindsight that I consider to be particularly relevant regarding further cases. The outcome of most decisions of the Swiss Federal Patent Court in 2023 heavily depended on the specific circumstances and the effects of…