Lessons learnt 6 February 2015
|
|
- Jean Washington
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Patent infringement Lessons learnt from patent case law in Europe in 2013 and 2014 Véron & Associés Seminar Paris Maison de la Recherche Sabine Agé Paris Lyon Patent infringement Bolar exemption (1/2) Art. L d) French IPC 1 : the studies and assays required to obtain a marketing authorization for a medicine, as well as the acts necessary to their completion and for obtaining the market authorization Scope of these provisions: 1. Acts to obtain a marketing authorization (MA) for non-generic products? 2. Acts to obtain a MA outside of France? 3. Supply of patent-protected product to a company which intends to use the product in tests necessary to obtain marketing authorization? 1 implementing Directive No. 2004/27/EC 2 Véron & Associés 1
2 Patent infringement Bolar exemption (2/2) 1. Acts to obtain a MA for non-generic products? Lilly France v. Sanofi Aventis Deutschland GmbH, TGI Paris, presiding judge, 15 December 2014: acts performed for obtaining a MA for a biosimilar (of insulin glargine) are exempted 2. Acts for obtaining MAs outside of France? Same decision: acts performed in France after the MA grant for France, to obtain Mas abroad, are exempted 3. Supply of patent-protected product to a company which intends to use the product in tests necessary to obtain marketing authorization? No guidance from CJEU after withdrawal of referral in Astellas Pharma Inc. v. Polpharma SA (C-661/13) 3 Patent infringement Prior Use Art. L French IPC: Any person who, within the territory in which this Book applies, at the filing date or priority date of a patent was, in good faith, in possession of the invention which is the subject matter of the patent shall enjoy a personal right to exploit that invention despite the existence of the patent. Prior use can be asserted even if the product according to the invention has not been put on the market: evidence of real and effective preparations for exploiting the invention is sufficient (Balipro v. Vinmer, TGI Paris, 6 June 2013) 4 Véron & Associés 2
3 Patent infringement Estoppel Well established case law according which the patentee cannot take a contradicting position on the scope of a patent claims: during examination or opposition of the patent and when construing their scope in the framework of patent infringement proceedings New illustration in a somewhat different context in Gestra v. Eurovia Béton, Cass. Com., 21 January 2014: the alleged infringer who paid royalties during more than 4 years pursuant to a license under the asserted patent cannot state without contradicting itself that it did not implement this patent 5 Patent infringement Infringement by equivalence Lessons learnt from UK, DE, NL case law? 6 Véron & Associés 3
4 Patent infringement Contributory infringement Lessons learnt from UK, DE, NL case law? 7 Thank you 1, rue Volney Paris Tel. +33 (0) Fax +33 (0) , avenue Maréchal Foch Lyon Tel. +33 (0) Fax +33 (0) Véron & Associés 4
5 Contributory Infringement Infringement by Equivalence Roche/Bolar Exemption - Germany - Max v. Rospatt Overview Contributory infringement Use patents Doctrine of equivalence Roche/Bolar exemption Véron & Associés 5
6 Contributory Infringement Contributory infringement by foreign supplier OLG Karlsruhe GRUR 2014, 59 MP2 Geräte delivery of essential element in Germany does not require direct delivery delivery to third party outside Germany sufficient if supplier knows that the end destination is in Germany Use Patents OLG Karlsruhe GRUR 2014, 764 Use Patent product directly infringes use claim if its appearance implies the patented use to the customer appearance refers to the products as such as well as to ist packaging, instruction manual, package insert and the like Véron & Associés 6
7 Doctrine of Equivalence BGH GRUR 2014, 852 if the man skilled in the art understands the claimed teaching as a selection of one of several embodiments disclosed in the specification the other embodiments cannot be regarded as equivalents Doctrine of Equivalence In recent time the Düsseldorf courts have handled the doctrine of equivalence more generous compared to previous years: OLG Düsseldorf GRUR-RR 2014, 185 WC-Sitzgelenk (reversed LG Düsseldorf) open bore with ring recess equals blindhole Véron & Associés 7
8 Doctrine of Equivalence LG Düsseldorf , 4b O 114/12 - Pemetrexeddikalium use of pemetrexed dipotassium is equivalent to use of pemetrexed disodium Roche/Bolar Exemption OLG Düsseldorf GRUR-RR 2014, 100 Marktzulassungsprivileg referral for preliminary ruling to the ECJ (C-661/13) referral withdrawn after case was settled Véron & Associés 8
9 Roche/Bolar Exemption OLG Düsseldorf Preliminary Opinion commercial third party supplier is covered by privilege if he can legimately assume that supplied products are exclusively used for privileged trials must take measures to ensure exclusive use (e.g. undertaking, warning etc.) 28 U.S.C to Take Discovery for Use in Foreign Proceedings evidence must be in US grant in discretion of Judge can be granted ex parte document production company witness - Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) protective order Véron & Associés 9
10 Thank you! Patent law developments The Netherlands CONTRIBUTORY INFRINGEMENT Gertjan Kuipers Attorney-at-law Partner Véron & Associés 10
11 3 February 2015 Contributory Infringement CA The Hague 27 January 2015: Novartis v Sun Novartis Sun VGZ (Insurance) EP689 (Patented: Zoledronine Acid) Market Authorisation (Generic Zoledronine Acid) Tender (For primary prescribed drug for VGZ patients) Patent for treatment of Osteoporosis Carve-out for osteoporosis Sun wins tender For treatment of both Osteoporosis and Paget Permit for treatment of Paget Contributory Infringement? 21 3 February 2015 Contributory Infringement CA The Hague 27 January 2015: Novartis v Sun Held Since Sun knew that VGZ's policy would inevitably lead to the use of the drug for treatment of Osteoporosis as well it should have done everything within its power to prevent such use. It had failed to do so. (par. 4.34) 1. Sun had sent an indicating that its Generic was to be used for treatment of Paget since Novartis held a patent for such treatment. It also indicated that the e- mail concerned a formality only. The DC held that this was insufficient. It should have indicated that it was not to be used for treatment of Osteoporosis. (par. 4.35) 2. Sun was not able to produce any evidence that it had tried to convince VGZ to split the tender for treatment for Paget and Osteoporosis. (par. 4.36). Sun's participation in the tender constituted contributory infringement. Véron & Associés 11
12 3 February 2015 The Coffee Battle 23 Patent law developments The Netherlands IINFRINGEMENT BY EQUIVALENCE Jan Pieter Hustinx Attorney-at-law Partner Véron & Associés 12
13 EQUIVALENCE From "free-for-all"to "nothing at all" Historic perspective Traditionally: "essence of the invention" important view point when establishing the scope of protection of a patent. Art. 69 EPC a l'hollandaise: not so much the literal text of the claims, but their perceived purported matters. Yardstick for equivalent infringement FWR test: equivalent measures are measures which perform essentially the same function, in essentially the same way to lead to essentially the same result. Minor stupidities of the patentee thus easily overlooked. E.g. see DSC, 22/03/2002, V. Bentum v. Kool: even if, as the CA had assumed, the embodiment used by the defendant was obvious at the time the claims were drafted and the patentee failed to claim this embodiment, there was no reason to assume that the patentee had intended to limit the scope of protection to exclude this embodiment: CA failed to sufficiently consider the fair protection to be afforded to patentee 25 EQUIVALENCE From "free-for-all" to "nothing at all" Historic perspective (ctd.) DSC, 25/05/2012, AGA v. Occlutech: demise of the essence doctrine - After first having noted (in 2007) that "the essence of the invention" is not necessarily the point of departure for interpretation of the claims, but "a viewpoint" to be taken into account in light of article 69 EPC, the DSC noted in AGA v. Occlutech that courts do not always have to take into account the essence: whether they do depends on the circumstances of the case, including in particular the patent specification: i.e. back to the patent text. Winds of change: - DSC, 04/04/2014, Medinol v Abbott: rethinking the scope of protection 26 Véron & Associés 13
14 Infringement DSC 4 April 2014: Medinol v Abbott Medinol (EP920): claimed stent included feature: "in its extended form having a patterned shape, comprising first meander patterns extending in a first direction and second meander patterns extending in a second direction, different form the first direction." Specification and drawings EP 920 refer only to "out phase" stents: Abbott markets an "in phase" stent 27 Scope of protection DSC 4 April 2014: Medinol v Abbott Court of Appeal There are no indications that in-phase patterns were claimed and therefore they fell outside the scope. Abbott (appeal to DSC) Descriptions and drawings cannot limit literal interpretation, only expand it. Bundesgerichtshof (FYI) There are no indications that in-phase patterns were excluded and therefore they fell within the scope. Urteil des X. Zivilsenats vom X ZR 19/11 Dutch Supreme Court The CA's interpretation was correct, as it had used the wording of the claims as a starting point and interpreted them in the light of the drawings, descriptions, and prior art. 28 Véron & Associés 14
15 Relevant date for interpretation v. infringement DSC 4 April 2014: Medinol v Abbott STEP 1: SCOPE OF PROTECTION Balancing literal interpretation and interpretation in which the claims are a mere guideline (cf. art. 1 Protocol to art. 69 EPC) Court must take due account of any equivalents known to the skilled man (cf. art. 2 Protocol to art. 69 EPC) Relevant date: Priority date because scope of protection is determined by what the invention has added in comparison to the prior art STEP 2: INFRINGEMENT Assess whether the person skilled in the art would understand the product or process falls within scope of protection (especially taking into account equivalents) Relevant date: Date of (alleged) infringement 29 Back to equivalence DC, 18/06/2014, MBI v. Shimano Case revolved around the question whether the feature "at least two sets of pawls" may encompass by equivalence "at least two (sets of one) pawl(s)". Based on FWR test, there were sound arguments to contend that two pawls in the context of the invention perform essentially the same function, in essentially the same way to lead to essentially the same result. Arguably, number of pawls in light of the essence of the invention was irrelevant. However, the court held (with reference to Medinol v. Abbott) that because scope of protection is to be determined from the perspective of the skilled man on the priority date, and is to take into account equivalents at that moment, equivalents that were foreseeable at the priority date, but not claimed, must be outside the scope of protection. The court then held that such foreseeable equivalents cannot subsequently play any role in assessing infringement by equivalence either. 30 Véron & Associés 15
16 Foreseeable equivalents exception confirmed DC, 23/07/2014, Bayer v. Sandoz Gist of MBI v. Shimano: scope of infringement by equivalence limited (at best) to equivalent measures which were not foreseeable at the priority date. If "foreseeable equivalents" are no longer to be taken into account in the equivalent infringement test, then "legal certainty of third parties" fully prevails, But what about "the fair protection for the patentee"? Yet, MBI v. Shimano confirmed verbatim in Bayer v. Sandoz a month later: "Medinol v. Abbott teaches that the scope of protection of a European patent is to be assessed from the perspective of the skilled man at the priority date. Foreseeable equivalents have to be taken into account in this assessment. As a rule there will be little room for any additional protection by equivalence, because foreseeable equivalents have already been taken into account. Only unforeseeable equivalents can play a role when assessing infringement". 31 Equivalence final conclusion In brief: Only measures which perform essentially the same function, in essentially the same way to lead to essentially the same result as a claimed feature, but were not foreseeable at the priority date, may under current case law amount to equivalent infringement. This effectively tolls the death bell of the doctrine of equivalence in the Netherlands. Have Dutch judges changed coats with the Germans? (LG Düsseldorf, 03/04/2014, Pemetrexed-di-kalium) 32 Véron & Associés 16
17 UK Patent Case Law Update Paris, Infringement Dr. Penny Gilbert Tim Whitfield Contributory infringement Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat) - Second medical use patent concerning pregabalin for treating pain. Claim in Swiss Form. - Interim injunction sought to require Actavis to take steps to ensure that pharmacists would refrain from supplying its product for use in the patented indication. - Mr Justice Arnold refused the interim injunction on the basis that there was no serious issue to be tried. Swiss form claim is a process claim (use of substance X for the preparation of a medicament for treating indication Y). Infringement allegation under s.60(1)(c) product of an infringing process. Key issue was for treating pain. Accepted that for means suitable and intended for. Was Actavis (skinny label) product intended for treating pain? Argument about whose intention is relevant - it is the intention of the manufacturer (and not the prescriber) that matters. What is required to show intention W-L sought to argue by analogy to s.60(2) contributory infringement and the requirement there that the person supplying the means essential have knowledge that the means would be intended to put the invention into effect. This failed the intention for contributory infringement is that of the ultimate user, and it is sufficient if the supplier of the means knows (or it is objectively obvious) that an ultimate user will intend to work the invention. Held that subjective intention of the manufacturer is needed; mere foreseeability is not enough. As Actavis MA did not extended to pain, and W-L had no basis upon which to allege that Actavis intended its product to be used off-label, it was held that there was no serious issue to be tried on the pleadings. A self standing allegation of s.60(2) infringement was not pursued Actavis product was not means for putting the invention into effect, as that could only have already been done by the act of manufacture. Véron & Associés 17
18 Bolar Exemption Revisions to Bolar exemption implementation in UK law existing wording directly linked to the abridged procedures of Directives 2001/82 and 2001/83 (s.60(5)(i)). Recent amendments (in force from October 2014) to the experimental use defence in s.60 of the UK Patents Act 1977, exempting acts done for the purpose of medicinal product assessment from infringement. Medicinal product assessment defined as: - any testing, course of testing or other activity undertaken with a view to providing data for any of the following purposes: (a) (b) (c) obtaining or varying an authorisation to sell or supply, or offer to sell or supply, a medicinal product (whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere); complying with any regulatory requirement imposed (whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere) in relation to such an authorisation; enabling a government or public authority (whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere), or a person (whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere) with functions of: (i) (ii) providing health care on behalf of such a government or public authority, or providing advice to, or on behalf of, such a government or public authority about the provision of health care, to carry out an assessment of suitability of a medicinal product for human use for the purpose of determining whether to use it, or recommend its use, in the provision of health care. Revisions leave the original Bolar provision (s.60(5)(i)) unchanged, but arguably redundant. New exemption broader in providing protection for acts done by originators as well as generics, and for the purpose of obtaining authorisations outside Europe. Remains to be seen whether the medicinal product assessment needs to be the only or dominant purpose of the relevant acts (as is the case under the existing case law (Corevalve v Edwards)), or if commercial activity having an experimental element is now also exempt. Véron & Associés 18
Lessons learnt 6 February 2015
Lessons learnt from patent case law in Europe in 2013 and 2014 Véron & Associés Seminar Paris Maison de la Recherche 6 February 2015 Isabelle Romet Paris Lyon 1. Main teachings of 2013-2014 (1/2) 1. Possible
More informationYoung EPLAW Congress. Bolar provision: a European tour. Brussels, 27 April 2015 Guillaume Bensussan Kathy Osgerby Agathe Michel de Cazotte
Young EPLAW Congress Bolar provision: a European tour Brussels, 27 April 2015 Guillaume Bensussan Kathy Osgerby Agathe Michel de Cazotte Introduction Bolar provision: a European tour Part 1 UK A) Recent
More informationINDIRECT INFRINGEMENT AND REPAIRS - EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE. Rachel Oxley Mewburn Ellis LLP, London, UK
INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT AND REPAIRS - EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE Rachel Oxley Mewburn Ellis LLP, London, UK OVERVIEW Repairs United Wire v Screen Repair Services Schütz v Werit Indirect Infringement Grimme v Scott
More informationPregabalin: Where stand plausibility, Swiss-form claims, late amendment and more?
University College London IBIL Innovation Seminar 2018 Pregabalin: Where stand plausibility, Swiss-form claims, late amendment and more? Dr. Matthias Zigann Presiding Judge Regional Court Munich I Swiss
More informationConstruction of second medical use claims. The Hon. Mr Justice Richard Arnold
Construction of second medical use claims The Hon. Mr Justice Richard Arnold The problem Claim 1 of European Patent (UK) No. 0 934 061 reads: Use of [pregabalin] or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof
More informationEUROPEAN PATENT LITIGATORS ASSOCIATION (EPLIT)
Litigators Asscociation EUROPEAN PATENT LITIGATORS ASSOCIATION (EPLIT) ACTAVIS V LILLY MILAN, 14 MAY 2018 EUROPEAN PATENT LITIGATORS ASSOCIATION Actavis UK Limited and others (Appellants) v Eli Lilly and
More informationThe Unitary Patent Plan Beta Update on National Case Law in Europe
The Unitary Patent Plan Beta Update on National Case Law in Europe Leythem Wall 28 November 2013 Declarations of Non-Infringement Article 15 of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement sets out the areas
More informationSecond Medical Use Patents in Europe: Are the UK and Germany Swapping Approaches?
WHITE PAPER January 2019 Second Medical Use Patents in Europe: Are the UK and Germany Swapping Approaches? The UK Supreme Court s ruling in Warner Lambert v Actavis resulted from deliberations over the
More informationGoing full circle: Bolar in Europe and the UPC
Going full circle: Bolar in Europe and the UPC ENGLAND, ROYLE AND DE COSTER : GOING FULL CIRCLE: BOLAR IN EUROPE AND THE UPC : VOL 14 ISSUE 2 BSLR 1 Article 10(6) of the Directive provides that the following
More informationIP Litigation in Life Sciences Germany 2016
IP Litigation in Life Sciences Germany 2016 Dr. Jan B. Krauss, Patent Attorney, Munich 2016 WIPO Conference Life Sciences Dispute Resolution Agenda The current landscape of life sciences enforcement in
More informationPlausibility, 2nd medical use and late amendments - The Dutch perspective after UK SC 14 Nov 2018 pregabalin case
20 November 2018 Pregabalin UCL Pregabalin UCL Plausibility, 2nd medical use and late amendments - The Dutch perspective after UK SC 14 Nov 2018 pregabalin case Judge Edger F. Brinkman, senior judge, Court
More information"And then there were. 18 th Annual Patent Seminar. Gordon Harris, Legal01# v1[GDH]
"And then there were three " Gordon Harris, 2016 18 th Annual Patent Seminar Legal01#57492496v1[GDH] Dedicated to the memory of David Keltie 1938 2016 1 CONTENTS Clause Heading Page 1 Introduction... 3
More informationti Litigating Patents Overseas: Country Specific Considerations Germany There is no "European" litigation system.
Wolfgang Festl-Wietek of Viering Jentschura & Partner Speaker 11: 1 LSI Law Seminars International ti Litigating Patents Overseas: Country Specific Considerations Germany by Wolfgang Festl-Wietek Viering,
More informationPresumption Of Patent Validity In Patent Litigations The New Trends
Presumption Of Patent Validity In Patent Litigations The New Trends 11 th EGA Legal Affairs Forum March 27, 2015 Kristof Roox, Partner, Crowell & Moring Contents A. Prima facie" validity of patents in
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims. Winnie Tham, Edmund Kok, Nicholas Ong
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: AIPPI SINGAPORE Second medical use or indication claims Winnie Tham, Edmund Kok, Nicholas Ong THAM, Winnie Date: 17
More informationDawn of an English Doctrine of Equivalents: immaterial variants infringe
Dawn of an English Doctrine of Equivalents: immaterial variants infringe November 2017 The Supreme Court reinvents patent infringement The Supreme Court s landmark judgment in Actavis v Eli Lilly is a
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims. Mr. Antonio Ray ORTIGUERA Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices Philippines
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: PHILIPPINES Second medical use or indication claims Mr. Alex Ferdinand FIDER Mr. Antonio Ray ORTIGUERA Angara Abello
More informationEuropean Union Law Working Papers
Stanford Vienna Transatlantic Technology Law Forum A joint initiative of Stanford Law School and the University of Vienna School of Law European Union Law Working Papers No. 25 Skinny Labelling and (Indirect)
More informationThe Unitary Patent and the Unified Patent Court EPLAW European Patent Lawyers Association Brussels 2 December 2011
EPLAW European Patent Lawyers Association Brussels 2 December 2011 Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association) Paris Lyon What happened in 2010-2011? July 2010 CJEU Advocates
More informationFrench case law on the consequences of the revocation of a patent on the payment of royalties by the licensee and of damages by the infringer
French case law on the consequences of the revocation of a patent on the payment of royalties by the licensee and of damages by the infringer Venice European patent judges forum 24 October 2015 Sabine
More informationDoctrine of Equivalents: Recent Developments in Germany
Doctrine of Equivalents: Recent Developments in Germany Young EPLAW Congress Brussels 24 April 2017 Ole Dirks decisively different Introduction Legal framework: Art. 69 para. 1 EPC / Sec. 14 German Patents
More informationSubstantive patent law harmonization: focus on grace period
Substantive patent law harmonization: focus on grace period IPO European practice committee conference 7 May 2014 Thomas Bouvet, Véron & Associés Paris Lyon A question regularly studied by the AIPPI AIPPI
More informationHow patents work An introduction for law students
How patents work An introduction for law students 1 Learning goals The learning goals of this lecture are to understand: the different types of intellectual property rights available the role of the patent
More informationSFIR / AIPPI 31 August Amendment of patent claims in France. Partial revocation of a claim by Court (only possibility until January 1, 2009)
Amendment of patent claims in France SFIR / AIPPI 31 August 2009 Isabelle Romet Paris Lyon Content 1. 2. Partial revocation of a claim by Court (only possibility until January 1, 2009) Ex-parte limitation
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims. [Please insert name last name in CAPITAL letters please]
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: New Zealand Second medical use or indication claims Michael BROWN, Partner Helen BELLCHAMBERS, Associate A J Park [Please
More informationQuestionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights. The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of:
The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of: Country: Germany Office: Federal Ministry of Justice and for Consumer Protection / German Patent and Trademark Office Person to be contacted:
More informationUniform protection and rights conferred: towards a limited unitary effect?
Uniform protection and rights conferred: towards a limited unitary effect? ERA & Queen Mary University Paris 29 November 2012 Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association)
More informationPatent litigation. Block 2. Module Fundamentals of infringement Essentials
Patent litigation. Block 2. Module Fundamentals Essentials GENERAL INTRODUCTION This module covers two fundamental aspects of patent protection: the scope of protection and the kind of conduct falling
More informationThe EU Unitary Patent System in its current state. EU-Japan Policy Seminar 22 November 2016
The EU Unitary Patent System in its current state EU-Japan Policy Seminar 22 November 2016 in force since January 20, 2013 Overview on the Unitary Patent System The European Patent with unitary effect
More informationThe Unitary Patent & The Unified Patent Court IP Key & Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London 8 November 2016
The Unitary Patent & The IP Key & Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London 8 November 2016 Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association) Member of
More informationInfringement of Claims: The Doctrine of Equivalents and Related Issues German Position
Infringement of Claims: The Doctrine of Equivalents and Related Issues German Position Dr Peter Meier-Beck Presiding Judge at the Bundesgerichtshof Honorary Professor at the University of Düsseldorf FICPI
More informationThe use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings
Question Q229 National Group: Netherlands Title: The use of prosecution history in post-grant patent proceedings Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: John ALLEN (Chair), Bas Berghuis van Woortman,
More informationDEFINITIONS. May be written into the law, or based on court decisions.
DEFINITIONS Research (Experimental Use) Exemption A provision that certain actions which fall within the claims of a granted patent are not patent infringement if they are done for the purposes of research.
More informationLiability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement
Question Q204P National Group: The Netherlands Title: Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Contributors: John Allen, Klaas Bisschop, Arnout Gieske, Willem
More informationEli Lilly v Actavis. Mark Engelman Head of Intellectual Property
Eli Lilly v Actavis Mark Engelman Head of Intellectual Property mark.engelman@hardwicke.co.uk Topics 1. Literalism 2. Ely Lilly v Actavis The Facts 3. Catnic Components Ltd v Hill & Smith Ltd [1982] RPC
More informationEuropean Patent Litigation: An overview
European Patent Litigation: An overview Tuesday 28 September 2010 Hogan Lovells in partnership with the Association of Corporate Counsel Europe Your speaker panel Co-Chairs: Marten Bezemer Associate General
More informationQuestion Q204P. Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement
Summary Report Question Q204P Liability for contributory infringement of IPRs certain aspects of patent infringement Introduction At its Congress in 2008 in Boston, AIPPI passed Resolution Q204 Liability
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: Canada Second medical use or indication claims Matthew ZISCHKA Santosh CHARI Carol HITCHMANN Roseanne CALDWELL Charles
More informationACTAVIS UK LTD v ELI LILLY & CO
38 [2016] R.P.C. 2 ACTAVIS UK LTD v ELI LILLY & CO COURT OF APPEAL Longmore, Kitchin and Floyd L.JJ.: 9-12 March and 25 June 2015 H1 [2015] EWCA Civ 555; [2016] R.P.C. 2 Patent European Patent Declaration
More informationSwitzerland. Esther Baumgartner Christoph Berchtold Simon Holzer Kilian Schärli Meyerlustenberger Lachenal. 1. Small molecules
Esther Baumgartner Christoph Berchtold Simon Holzer Kilian Schärli Meyerlustenberger Lachenal 1. Small molecules 1.1 Product and process claims Classic drug development works with small, chemically manufactured
More informationThe German constitutional challenge
Unified Patent Court Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association) Member of the Expert Panel group of the Unified Patent Court Member of the Drafting Committee of the Rules
More informationThe Current Status of the European Patent Package
The Current Status of the European Patent Package Pierre Véron Honorary President EPLAW (European Patent Lawyers Association) Member of the Expert Panel group of the Unified Patent Court Member of the
More informationIntellectual Property Department Hong Kong, China. Contents
Intellectual Property Department Hong Kong, China Contents Section 1: General... 1 Section 2: Private and/or non-commercial use... 3 Section 3: Experimental use and/or scientific research... 3 Section
More informationCOMPULSORY LICENCE in Germany. Markus Rieck LL.M.
COMPULSORY LICENCE in Germany Markus Rieck LL.M. 1 1877 - GERMAN PATENT ACT Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-R68588 / P. Loescher & Petsch / CC-BY-SA 3.0 2 Public interest Dependent patent Plant breeders privilege*
More informationHarmonisation across Europe - comparison and interaction between the EPO appeal system and the national judicial systems
- comparison and interaction between the EPO appeal system and the national judicial systems 22 nd Annual Fordham IP Law & Policy Conference 24 April 2014, NYC by Dr. Klaus Grabinski Federal Court of Justice,
More informationSupreme Court of the Netherlands. in the matter of:
Pharma and Pharmachemie; English translation of IEF 17241; www.ie-forum.nl/?showarticle=17241 ) 3 November 2017 First Chamber 15/04934 RM/EE Supreme Court of the Netherlands Judgment in the matter of:
More informationQuestionnaire February Special Committee Q228 - Patents. on Prior User Rights
Questionnaire February 2014 Special Committee Q228 - Patents on Prior User Rights This is the response of the UK group. It is submitted subject to council approval and may be amended following our next
More informationPatent Infringement Damages in France
Patent Infringement Damages in France Pierre VÉRON VÉRON & ASSOCIÉS 6, square de l'opéra Louis Jouvet F 75009 PARIS Tel. + 33.1.53.05.91.91 Fax + 33.1.53.05.91.98 53, avenue Maréchal Foch F 69006 LYON
More informationG3/08 PATENTABILITY OF SOFTWARE : DETAILS EXPECTED FROM
G3/08 PATENTABILITY OF SOFTWARE : DETAILS EXPECTED FROM THE ENLARGED BOARD OF APPEAL WILL BE WELCOME By Jean-Robert CALLON DE LAMARCK Partner European and French Patent Attorney The debate on software
More informationDoctrine of Equivalents: Recent Developments in Switzerland
Doctrine of Equivalents: Recent Developments in Switzerland Young EPLAW Congress Brussels 24 April 2017 Peter Ling 2 1 Introduction Federal Patent Court (2012-) Statutory basis of equivalence - "imitation
More informationPROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
PROPOSALS FOR CREATING UNITARY PATENT PROTECTION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION The idea of a Community Patent, a single patent that can be enforced throughout the European Union (EU), is hardly new. The original
More informationPatentable Subject Matter and Medical Use Claims in the Pharmaceutical Sector
Patentable Subject Matter and Medical Use Claims in the Pharmaceutical Sector 2012 LIDC Congress, Prague, 12 October 2012 Dr. Simon Holzer, Attorney-at-Law, Partner 3 October 2012 2 Introduction! Conflicting
More informationIP & IT Bytes. November Patents: jurisdiction and declaratory relief
November 2016 IP & IT Bytes First published in the November 2016 issue of PLC Magazine and reproduced with the kind permission of the publishers. Subscription enquiries 020 7202 1200. Patents: jurisdiction
More informationSPC system simple, transparent and easy to apply? By Peter Damerell, Ayesha Raghib and William Hillson Powell Gilbert LLP
SPC system simple, transparent and easy to apply? By Peter Damerell, Ayesha Raghib and William Hillson Powell Gilbert LLP The strength and depth of our intellectual property expertise is second to none,
More informationIP Report Patent Law. The right of priorities: Recent developments in EPO case law Reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher
The right of priorities: Recent developments in EPO case law Reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher Recent decisions passed by three different instances of the EPO have significant effects on the patentability
More informationWhere are we now with plausibility?
/0/7 Where are we now with plausibility? Jin Ooi, Allen & Overy LLP (UK) Monday April 7 What s the big deal with plausibility? For the first time since the first edition in 188, the 18 th edition of Terrell
More informationStrategies for successful Patent Enforcement in Germany. Michael Knospe, Partner, SJ Berwin LLP
Strategies for successful Patent Enforcement in Germany Michael Knospe, Partner, SJ Berwin LLP 1 Overview 1. Some statistical data 2. Why Germany? 3. Infringement proceedings 4. Preliminary injunction
More informationUnited Kingdom. By Penny Gilbert, Kit Carter and Stuart Knight, Powell Gilbert LLP
Powell Gilbert LLP United Kingdom United Kingdom By Penny Gilbert, Kit Carter and Stuart Knight, Powell Gilbert LLP Q: What options are open to a patent owner seeking to enforce its rights in your jurisdiction?
More informationThe European Patent and the UPC
The European Patent and the UPC Robin Keulertz German Patent Attorney, European Patent Attorney, European Trademark and Design Attorney February 22nd, 2019 Current European Patent Grant Procedure Invention
More informationNOTICE: THIS IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT
NOTICE: THIS IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT Between Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute and the Recipient institution It is essential that the person signing this contract on behalf of the Recipient institution
More informationRECENT EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING PATENT EXTENSIONS (SPCs AND PAEDIATRIC EXTENSIONS)
KUIPERS, DOUMA AND KOKKE : RECENT EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING PATENT EXTENSIONS (SPCs AND PAEDIATRIC EXTENSIONS) : VOL 12 ISSUE 4 BSLR 123 RECENT EUROPEAN DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING PATENT EXTENSIONS (SPCs
More informationNetherlands. Report Q 175
1 Netherlands Report Q 175 in the name of the Dutch Group K.A.J. Bisschop, R.E. Ebbink (chair), A.E. Heezius, M.H.J. van den Horst, A. Killan, A.A.G. Land, C.S.M. Morel The role of equivalents and prosecution
More informationThe Patents Act 1977 (as amended)
The Patents Act 1977 (as amended) An unofficial consolidation produced by Patents Legal Section 17 December 2007 UK Intellectual Property Office is an operating name of the Patent Office 1 Note to users
More informationAlchemy in the UK: the Supreme Court in Eli Lilly V Actavis transmutes sodium into potassium but will it provide gold for patentees?
WHITEHEAD AND JACKSON : ALCHEMY IN THE UK: THE SUPREME COURT IN ELI LILLY v ACTAVIS TRANSMUTES SODIUM INTO POTASSIUM : VOL 16 ISSUE 3 BSLR 135 Alchemy in the UK: the Supreme Court in Eli Lilly V Actavis
More informationBrinkhof. Defendant s Objection to the Application for Provisional Measures. Merva. Pentapharm
Brinkhof Unified Patent Court Local Division Milan [Address] Action number: [ ] Date oral hearing: 20 September 2016 Date submission: 6 September 2016 Defendant s Objection to the Application for Provisional
More informationSupplementary protection certificates (SPCs) (Skeleton)
42 nd AIPPI Congress, Paris Supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) (Skeleton) Workshop Pharma I 5 October 2010, 9:00 to 10:30 am Moderator: Élisabeth-Thouret Lemaître, from Lavoix, France Speakers:
More informationQuestionnaire on Exceptions and Limitations to Patent Rights. The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of:
The answers to this questionnaire have been provided on behalf of: Country: Austria... Office: Austrian Patent Office (APO)... Person to be contacted: Name:... Title:... E-mail:... Telephone:... Facsimile:...
More informationSEPs & FRAND after Huawei/ZTE Report from the Venice Judges Forum:
SEPs & FRAND after Huawei/ZTE Report from the Venice Judges Forum: Mark van Gardingen Brussels (EPLAW), 24 November 2017 SEP s & FRAND panel in Venice Moderator: - Rian Kalden, Court of Appeal Judge (NL)
More informationStrategies to protect a market entry against (provisional) injunctions
Strategies to protect a market entry against (provisional) injunctions Dr. Clemens Tobias Steins, LL.M. German Attorney-at-Law Partner 1 Life Science IP Seminar 2017 Strategies to protect a market entry
More informationGLOBAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWSLETTER IP AND PHARMA ISSUE 09/18
19 TH EDITION GLOBAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWSLETTER 2 19 TH EDITION Introduction Welcome to the 19 th Edition of the Clifford Chance Global IP Newsletter. This newsletter focuses on patent law and especially
More informationIN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER CHAPTER ELEVEN OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES (1976)
IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION UNDER CHAPTER ELEVEN OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND THE UNCITRAL ARBITRATION RULES (1976) BETWEEN: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY Claimant/Investor AND: GOVERNMENT
More information7 Problems Surrounding Intellectual Property Rights under Private International Law
7 Problems Surrounding Intellectual Property Rights under Private International Law Despite the prospected increase in intellectual property (IP) disputes beyond national borders, there are no established
More informationSecond medical use or indication claims
Question Q238 National Group: Title: Contributors: Reporter within Working Committee: Bulgarian National Group Second medical use or indication claims Valentina NESHEVA Valentina NESHEVA Date: 16 May 2014
More informationFUNCTIONAL CLAIMING UNDER THE EPC General principles and case-law
FUNCTIONAL CLAIMING UNDER THE EPC General principles and case-law Elisabetta Papa Società Italiana Brevetti S.p.A. Functional claiming is allowed under the EPC and related case-law, with a few disclosure-specific
More informationJUDGMENT. The company under foreign law QUALCOMM INCORPORATED having its registered office at San Diego, USA
JUDGMENT COURT OF DISTRICT THE HAGUE Civil law section Docket number 287058 / HA ZA 07-1470 Judgment of November 14, 2007 In the case of: 1. The limited liability company NOKIA NEDERLAND B.V., having its
More informationPartial Priorities and Transfer of Priority Rights. Dr. Joachim Renken
Partial Priorities and Transfer of Priority Rights Dr. Joachim Renken AN EXAMPLE... 15 C Prio 20 C Granted Claim 10 C 25 C In the priority year, a document is published that dicloses 17 C. Is this document
More informationEffective Mechanisms for Challenging the Validity of Patents
Effective Mechanisms for Challenging the Validity of Patents Walter Holzer 1 S.G.D.G. Patents are granted with a presumption of validity. 2 A patent examiner simply cannot be aware of all facts and circumstances
More informationPATENT SYSTEM STATUS OFREFORMS
THE UNITARY PATENT SYSTEM STATUS OFREFORMS 1. STATUS OF REFORMS* On December 11, 2012 the EU Parliament approved the implementation of the Unitary Patent System based on a Unitary Patent Regulation (Council
More informationGermany. Henrik Holzapfel and Martin Königs. McDermott Will & Emery
GERMANY Germany Henrik Holzapfel and Martin Königs Patent Enforcement Proceedings 1 Lawsuits and courts What legal or administrative proceedings are available for enforcing patent rights against an infringer?
More informationIndirect infringement: a pan-european viewpoint
Indirect infringement: a pan-european viewpoint Hannes Obex Sergio Poza Renaud Fulconis Kilian Schärli Similar statutory provisions in DE, FR, ES Indirect infringement: third party not having the patent
More informationQUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FD1 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 66%
QUESTION PAPER REFERENCE: FD1 PERCENTAGE MARK AWARDED: 66% Question 1 Because the subject matter of the invention relates to military technology there is an obligation on the applicant not to disclose
More informationAn introduction to European intellectual property rights
An introduction to European intellectual property rights Scott Parker Adrian Smith Simmons & Simmons LLP 1. Patents 1.1 Patentable inventions The requirements for patentable inventions are set out in Article
More informationDHS Patentanwaltsgesellschaft mbh Munich. RECENT RULINGS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE ON SPCs
Dr. Stefan Danner December 2011 German and European Patent Attorney danner@dhs-patent.de RECENT RULINGS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE ON SPCs In the last few months, the European Court of Justice (ECJ)
More informationCA/PL 7/99 Orig.: German Munich, SUBJECT: Revision of the EPC: Articles 52(4) and 54(5) President of the European Patent Office
CA/PL 7/99 Orig.: German Munich, 2.3.1999 SUBJECT: Revision of the EPC: Articles 52(4) and 54(5) DRAWN UP BY: ADDRESSEES: President of the European Patent Office Committee on Patent Law (for opinion) SUMMARY
More informationThe Unified Patent Court explained in detail. Managing Intellectual Property European Patent Reform Forum 19 September 2013 Munich
The Unified Patent Court explained in detail Managing Intellectual Property European Patent Reform Forum 19 September 2013 Munich The Panel Alex Wilson Lawyer Powell & Gilbert London Christine Kanz Lawyer
More informationUtility Model Act, Secs. 12a,19, third sent. - "Cable Duct" (Kabeldurchführung) *
30 IIC 558 (1999) Germany Utility Model Act, Secs. 12a,19, third sent. - "Cable Duct" (Kabeldurchführung) * 1. In the proceedings concerning infringement of a utility model, which had been registered after
More informationPatent Litigation. Block 2; Module Plaintiff /Claimant. Essentials. The patent proprietor as plaintiff/claimant in infringement proceedings
Patent litigation. Block 2. Module Essentials The patent proprietor as plaintiff/claimant in infringement proceedings In a patent infringement action and/or any other protective measure, the plaintiff/claimant
More informationLitigating standard essential patents: any news from CJEU in Huawei v. ZTE? Young EPLAW. Brussels, April 27th, Dr. Tobias J. Hessel.
Litigating standard essential patents: any news from CJEU in Huawei v. ZTE? Young EPLAW Brussels, April 27th, 2015 Dr. Tobias J. Hessel Overview I. Potential new requirements for FRAND defense 1) Market
More informationSecuring evidence across borders in EU patent litigation
VO International International Securing evidence across borders in EU patent litigation By Peter de Lange, VO Technical evidence is often essential for enforcing patents, in particular patents for processes.
More informationAttachment: Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing Regulations of the Patent Law of the People s Republic of China
March 31, 2009 To: Legislative Affairs Office State Council People s Republic of China Hirohiko Usui President Japan Intellectual Property Association Opinions on the Draft Amendment of the Implementing
More informationPatent Enforcement UK perspectives
Patent Enforcement UK perspectives Options for Patentees and Potential Defendants Ian Kirby Partner FICPI St. Petersburg 6 October 2016 UK: Key Factors 1) Choice of court 2) Types of patent claim 3) Preliminary
More informationInternational Product Liability Review (incorporating European Product Liability Review) Issue 48 - September Contents. Overview.
International Product Liability Review (incorporating European Product Liability Review) Issue 48 - September 2012 Contents Overview 1 Europe UK 36 Feature - Growing use of nanomaterials in consumer products:
More informationChapter Patent Infringement --
Chapter 5 -- Patent Infringement -- In this chapter, we will explore the scope of a patent and how it is determine whether a patent has been infringed. The scope of a patent, i.e., what the patent covers,
More informationCase 3:16-cv MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 09/16/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:16-cv-05678-MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 09/16/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 Liza M. Walsh Tricia B. O Reilly Katelyn O Reilly WALSH PIZZI O REILLY FALANGA LLP 1037 Raymond Boulevard, Suite 600 Newark,
More informationPatent amendments in Germany: Formal aspects
Title Brevetto di invenzione: un titolo a geometria variabile? Patent amendments in Germany: Formal aspects Klaus Bacher Federal Court of Justice, Karlsruhe Milano, 27 and 28 June 2014 Agenda Overview
More information4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA
4. COMPARISON OF THE INDIAN PATENT LAW WITH THE PATENT LAWS IN U.S., EUROPE AND CHINA Provisions of the Indian patent law were compared with the relevant provisions of the patent laws in U.S., Europe and
More informationAbstract. Keywords. Kotaro Kageyama. Kageyama International Law & Patent Firm, Tokyo, Japan
Beijing Law Review, 2014, 5, 114-129 Published Online June 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/blr http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/blr.2014.52011 Necessity, Criteria (Requirements or Limits) and Acknowledgement
More informationSlide 13 What rights does a patent confer?
Slide 13 What rights does a patent confer? The term of the European patent shall be 20 years from the date of filing of the application (Article 63(1) EPC. However, nothing in Article 63(1) EPC shall limit
More informationWorking Guidelines Q238. Second medical use and other second indication claims
Working Guidelines by Thierry CALAME, Reporter General Sarah MATHESON and John OSHA, Deputy Reporters General Anne Marie VERSCHUR, Sara ULFSDOTTER and Kazuhiko YOSHIDA Assistants to the Reporter General
More informationThe Royal Society of Chemistry IP Law Case Seminar: 2017 in the U.S.
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP The Royal Society of Chemistry IP Law Case Seminar: 2017 in the U.S. Anthony C. Tridico, Ph.D. 2017 1 Agenda U.S. Supreme Court news 2017 U.S. Court
More information