The case concerns the transfer of a priority right from an employee to his/her employer and the relevant time zone for determining the priority: 1. The validity of the transfer of rights to an invention by the employer by claiming it as a service invention is governed by the law applicable to the employment contract….
This is a follow-up to Jan-Diederik Lindemans’ post of 18 December 2019 discussing the guidelines on legal privilege during saisie-contrefaçon adopted by the Brussels Bar Association (‘BBA’) on 21 October 2019. In a judgment of 26 March 2020, the Ghent Business Court confirmed the BBA’s position on this issue. In the 26 March 2020 judgment,…
Some positive news from the European Patent Office. Former Secretary of SUEPO The Hague and member of the Central Staff Committee Laurent Prunier, who was dismissed in 2016 on dubious grounds by former EPO president Benoit Battistelli, has reached a settlement with the Office, almost two years after António Campinos took over from his controversial…
With the rendering of the judgment in Royalty Pharma (C-650/17) by the Court of Justice of the European Union today on 30 April 2020, a series of referrals relating to the interpretation of Article 3(a) of the SPC Regulation, which requires that the product of an SPC must be “protected” by the basic patent, finally…
Back in 2018 the European Commission appointed a Group of Experts on licensing and valuation of standard essential patents (SEPs). Their report is expected to be released later this year. What to expect from this Group of Experts? The mission of the Group of Experts is to “deepen the expertise on evolving industry practices related…
In its 30 January ruling in Generics (UK) and others v CMA, the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) in effect upheld the existing approach of the European Commission and EU General Court in relation to the assessment of so-called “reverse payment” patent settlements. The CJEU confirmed that settlements in which a generics manufacturer is paid…
The decision of the European Patent Office to start holding videoconferences as the standard way of conducting oral proceedings in examination and opposition proceedings is facing heavy criticism. There has been no testing, no consultation, the EPO doesn’t have the facilities, it may be discriminatory and in violation of Article 113(1) EPC, according to the…
by Olivia Henry and Nicholas Michelmore On 20 April 2020, Arnold LJ (sitting as a High Court Judge) gave judgment in the case between FibroGen Inc and Astellas Pharma Inc (together the “Claimants”), and Akebia Therapeutics Inc and Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company Limited (together the “Defendants”) which concerned six patents owned by FibroGen and exclusively licensed…
The PTAB did not establish the existence of a motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the aspects of existing patents and prior art. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has vacated and remanded a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board holding that a patent…
As many laboratories around the world are making every effort to find a treatment for Covid-19 and more clinical trials are conducted[1], it is worth considering the legal mechanisms that could facilitate the quantitatively and qualitatively sufficient, and financially acceptable, exploitation of patent rights that will prove useful in curbing the epidemic and preventing a…
