Germany’s Federal Court of Justice revokes Leo’s Calcipotriol Monohydrate Patent
This contribution compares various decisions of national European courts on inventive step in the case of a monohydrate of a (known) drug, i.e. calcipotriol.
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.
The Italian Supreme Court on the test for prior disclosure
By decision of 23 March 2012, the Supreme Court decided a case between two competitors in the field of steel products and machinery, concerning in particular the alleged infringement of two Italian patents covering a winding up mechanism for steel wire. The alleged infringer had counterclaimed invalidity based on prior disclosure, claiming in particular that…
Supreme Court decision regarding the creative step test for Danish utility models
In a recent decision (16.5.2012) the Supreme Court in Denmark has ruled on the requirement of creative step that applies to Danish utility models and serves the same purpose as inventive step in respect of patents. The utility model-in-suit had been invalidated by the Danish Patent Office and that decision was upheld by the Maritime…
E-mail via SMS, Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), 22 November 2011
When seeking to improve a data structure prescribed in an international standard, the skilled person would consider mechanisms already described in the standard when solving the identified technical problem. If the standard provides a manageable number of possible solutions, each having specific advantages and disadvantages, this provides an incentive to take each of the solutions…
Vericore v. The Danish Board of Appeals, Maritime and Commercial Court (Højesteret), 24 January 2012
The Danish Maritime and Commercial Court upheld the invalidation (in two administrative instances) of a patent claiming second medical use of a known compound for the treatment of sea lice infestation on the grounds that neither the pathology nor the patient group were novel over the closest prior art. The European sister patent had likewise…
Preliminary Injunction: Condition and Obstacle
In a decision of 21 March 2012, the Cour d’Appel of Paris ruled on the issue of the appraisal which the French judge has to make when a request for a preliminary injunction against acts allegedly infringing a patent or an SPC is referred to him. Novartis AG is the holder and SAS Novartis Pharma is the…
A new decision on second medical use – Vericore Limited vs. The Danish Board of Appeals
In a recent decision rendered by the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court, a Danish patent invalidated administratively in both the first and second instance by the Danish Patent Office was held invalid by the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court also. The European sister patent had likewise been invalidated at the EPO Technical Board of Appeals…
Who’s the skilled sausage-maker? It’s a team, decrees Germany's Federal Court of Justice
As in other jurisdictions, German Courts try to determine whether an invention is patentable over the prior art by looking at it through the eyes of the notional skilled person at the effective filing date of the patent at issue. In a decision pronounced on March 6, 2012 (docket X ZR 78/09), the German Federal…
Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Schering Pharma AG [2012] EWCA Civ 235
Last April we reported the case of Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Schering Pharma AG [2011] EWHC 583 (Pat), concerning immediate release formulations of a combination contraceptive product containing the steroidal hormones drospirenone and ethinylestradiol. We can now report the decision of the Court of Appeal in this case (handed down on 7 March 2012)…
Pharmaq AS v. Intervet International B.V., Court of Appeal, (Borgarting Appelate Court) 22 December 2011
The Court of Appeal dismissed Pharmaq’s claim that Intervet’s patent claiming deposited virus strains and closely related strains sharing genotypic and phenotypic characteristics was invalid and that its vaccine did not infringe. The court held that the patent only covered the virus in isolated form and that the isolation of the virus strain from nature…