Posted: December 14th, 2018
Megaplast v. Ecoventi / Barcelona Court of Appeals, 14 May 2018, Docket No. 322/2018 In a decision rendered on 14 May 2018, the Barcelona Court of Appeals upheld a judgment dated 22 September 2016 by Barcelona Commercial Court No. 1, according to which ECOVENTI SISTEMAS S.L. (hereinafter, ECOVENTI) was held responsible for the infringement of […]
READ MORE
Posted: December 13th, 2018
Judgments in Cases T-677/14 Biogaran v. Commission, T-679/14 Teva UK and Others v. Commission, T680/14 Lupin v. Commission, T-682/14 Mylan Laboratories and Mylan v. Commission, T-684/14 Krka v. Commission, T-701/14 Niche Generics v. Commission, T-705/14 Unichem Laboratories v. Commission, T-691/14 Servier and Others v. Commission, General Court of the European Union, Luxembourg, 12 December 2018 […]
READ MORE
Posted: December 11th, 2018
Exceptions to patentability – Plant products produced by essentially biological processes, Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04, decision of 5 December 2018 in case T 1914/12, reported by Dr. Rudolf Teschemacher, Bardehle Pagenberg The reported decision sets the refusal of an application for new pepper plants and fruits with nutritional value aside. The ground for refusal was that […]
READ MORE
Posted: December 7th, 2018
At oral proceedings, which took place on 5 December 2018, Technical Board of Appeal 3304 held that Rule 28(2) EPC -excluding plant products produced by essentially biological processes from patentability- is in conflict with Article 53(b) EPC as interpreted by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decisions G 2/12 and G 2/13. The Board referred […]
READ MORE
Posted: December 7th, 2018
Ancientgrain B.V. v. Bakels Senior N.V., District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 21 November 2018, Case No. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:13960 Two Dutch patents of Ancientgrain relating to processed ‘Teff-grain’ (Eragrostis grain) lack inventive step and are thus not infringed by Bakels. A message sent to potential Teff growers (the ‘Teff-document’) before the application date of the patents […]
READ MORE
Posted: December 5th, 2018
Astrazeneca AB v. Sandoz B.V., Court of Appeal The Hague, The Netherlands, 27 November 2018, Case no. 200.237.828/01, with thanks to Willem Hoyng and Theo Blomme, HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER, for sending in the case The Court of Appeal of The Hague has upheld AstraZeneca’s patents EP 1 250 138 B2 and EP 2 255 573 […]
READ MORE
Posted: November 29th, 2018
‘Beheizbarer Boden für Viehställe’, Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf, 19 July 2018, docket no. 15 U 43/15 Direct patent infringement of combination patents and recall from obligors abroad if patent-free replacement deliveries are possible In the above-mentioned decision, the Higher Regional Court deals with three legal aspects: First, the Senate confirms its previous case law […]
READ MORE
Posted: November 27th, 2018
Intellectual Property and the Judiciary, European Intellectual Property Institute Network series, Elgar, edited by Christophe Geiger, Craig Allen and Xavier Seuba “Intellectual Property and the Judiciary explores the role of the judiciary in the elaboration and interpretation of intellectual property law, exploring how IP doctrine and policy are developed and the manner in which judges […]
READ MORE
Posted: November 22nd, 2018
Hexal AG and Stada Artzneimittel AG v. Eli Lilly and Company, Federal Patent Court, Germany, 17 July 2018, Case no. 3 Ni 23/16 (EP) joined with 3 Ni 19/17 (EP), with thanks to Dr. Michael Best from Lederer & Keller, for providing the decision and an English translation thereof This blog has covered the pemetrexed […]
READ MORE
Posted: November 22nd, 2018
Network Homes Limited v. Maurice Harlow, High Court of Justice, London, 16 November 2018, citation number [2018] EWHC 3120 (Ch) This case concerned the construction of a contract. However, the judge (Mr Justice Carr, one of the UK Patents Court’s main judges) noted that the same issue of the correct approach to construction also arises […]
READ MORE
EMAIL US
