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.
On 18 July 2023, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in Vernacare Limited v Moulded Fibre Products Limited [2023] EWCA Civ 841, an appeal from the decision of Nicholas Caddick QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court). The Court of Appeal, with Sir Christopher Floyd giving…
On 4 May 2023, a mere two weeks after the conclusion of the hearing, the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in Sandoz and Teva v BMS. The appeal decision is centred on the question of plausibility and comes hot on the heels of the Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G 2/21. Indeed,…
His Honour Judge Hacon handed down judgment in AutoStore v Ocado on 30 March 2023. The case was atypical in that it had a split trial: the first part of the trial considered whether AutoStore’s patents (EP 794 and EP 027) were rendered invalid by prior disclosures made in Russia, the second part considered “technical…
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) did not err by declining to consider a patentee’s claim construction arguments raised for the first time at oral argument. The holder of a patent for retail point-of-sale of cards allowing a purchaser to download specified content from the internet was not entitled to reversal of a PTAB…
On 21 March 2023, Meade J gave a bumper judgment in the revocation action brought by Gilead in respect of two of NuCana’s patents from the same family (EP (UK) 2 955 190 and EP (UK) 3 904 365, the “Patents”), which relate to nucleoside analogues. Filling 102 pages, the judgment raises a number of…
Because prior art described a method that could execute an application on one computer server, it should have been obvious that the method could be applied to multiple servers. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred when it found that several claims of a patent describing the remote application of a computer application were not…
This decision dealt with the practically important question of whether the claim can still be waived in the proceedings on the complaint against denial of leave to appeal, i.e. after the conclusion of the appeal proceedings. This becomes particularly relevant if the patent in suit is held invalid and the opposing party does not agree…
The claimed methods of filtering, highlighting, and selecting portions of maps or other visual information for display had long been done by hand, and the claims failed to describe specific technological improvements making them patent-eligible. Two IBM software patents related to graphical display technology were invalid for claiming ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §…
On 24 August 2022, Nicholas Caddick QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court) handed down his decision in Vernacare Limited v Moulded Fibre Products Limited [2022] EWHC 2197 (IPEC), a case on open topped washbowls made from moulded paper pulp, such as those used in hospitals, care homes…
On 4 August 2022, the English Patents court handed down its decision in Shenzhen Carku Technology Co., Ltd v The NOCO Company, a case on battery-powered car jump starters. The decision of Mr Justice Meade is of particular interest as it addresses experts and hindsight, the third limb of the Actavis questions on the doctrine…
