The patentee (Claimant) filed a request for an interim injunction against the Defendant, ordering it to stop using the patented method, stop selling or importing Valsacor film coated tablets or any other products that would infringe the European patent, to seize the mentioned tablets, and to order Defendant to pay a penalty. The court rejected…
It has been reported by the Italian Generics Association that on 14 March 2011 the European Commission started infringement proceedings against Italy for an alleged breach of Community law related to Art. 68 (1bis) of the Italian IP Code according to which “companies intending to manufacture pharmaceutical specialties outside patent protection may commence the procedure…
In the recent case of Schütz v Werit, the Court of Appeal examined the boundary between repair and making under the English implementation of Article 25 of the Community Patent Convention. The claimants’ patent in question was for intermediate bulk containers (IBCs), in particular IBCs comprising two parts: a cage and a large plastic container…
On 2 March 2011, the Court of Appeal of Barcelona (Section 15) handed down a judgment that has helped to clarify the scope of Article 125.2 of the Spanish Patent Act, which had been interpreted in different ways by some Courts of First Instance since its modification in 2001. Article 125.2 establishes that “the judge…
The German Patent Act (sec. 145) provides for a special limitation of further actions on account of the same or similar act based on different patents. Such actions shall only be admissible if the plaintiff was not in a position to assert a patent in an earlier suit without his own fault. The landmark decision…
On 10 March, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued its long-awaited opinion on the patentability of human embryonic stem cells in Brüstle v Greenpeace C-34/10. Biotechnological inventions are subject to Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions (the “Directive”). Article 6(1)…
Daiichi Sankyo (hereinafter referred to as “Daiichi”) was the holder, for a drug whose active principle was pravastatine, of a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) granted on 26 August 1992 which expired on 10 August 2006. This company claimed that Sandoz had, since July 2006, manufactured and put on the French market a generic drug of pravastatine, thereby infringing the exclusive…
As reported in teh blog on 9 March, 2011, ratiopharm has managed on appeal to the High Court to overturn the first instance decision to grant a PI against ratiopharm which had initiated its own distribution of escitalopram products after the dominant wholesaler in Denmark was injuncted and the other wholesalers followed suit. The hearing…
On 2 March 2011 the Barcelona Court of Appeal handed down a judgment reversing a decision from Commercial Court number 4 of Barcelona, which had rejected a “lis pendens” defence pleaded by the owner of patent EP 409.281 against a revocation action filed by L.A. et altri based on lack of inventive step. In its…
While in the past the German courts generally presumed that exposing a product on a trade fair constituted an infringing offer and, hence, a danger of repetition, the District Court of Mannheim recently raised the burden of demonstration and proof for patent owners. Following the (vague) reasoning of the Federal Supreme Court in a trademark…
