Posted: February 28th, 2012
Hospira UK Limited and Hospira Enterprises B.V. v. Aventis Pharma S.A., District Court of Stockholm, 7 October 2011, Docket No. T 19169-10The Hospira companies held the marketing authorization for and imported the pharmaceutical Docetaxel Hospira for Sweden. Aventis Pharam S.A. held three EP patents for Sweden and had in other jurisdictions claimed that Docetaxel Hospira […]
READ MOREPosted: February 27th, 2012
The Swedish Supreme Court Clarifies the Law on Time Bar for Damages Claims, by Erik Ficks, Roschier The caseThe Swedish Supreme Court recently had the opportunity to provide guidance on the issue of time bar for damages claims in patent infringement cases (NJA 2011 s. 270). The case concerns a long-standing patent dispute between Lely […]
READ MOREPosted: February 27th, 2012
Occlutech GmbH v. AGA Medical Corporation, AGA Medical Corporation v. Occlutech International AB and Tor Peters (private person), District Court of Stockholm, 4 March 2011, Docket No. T 18865-07 and T 4110-08 (joint cases)Occlutech GmbH requested that the District Court should declare that it is free to sell its product in Sweden, irrespective of AGA […]
READ MOREPosted: February 24th, 2012
University of Queensland & CSL Limited v Comptroller General of Patents, High Court, 14 February 2012, Case Number: CH/2010/APP/0620, Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 223 (Pat) The decision of the CJEU in Medeva (noted here) has been widely commented upon and has now been applied by the High Court. In a related reference the CJEU […]
READ MOREPosted: February 24th, 2012
Biogaran v. Laboratoire Medidom, Laboratoires Negma, Tribunal de grande instance (3rd chamber, 3rd division), Paris, 27 January 2012, Case No. 09/17355, with thanks to Sabine Age and Marta Mendes Moreira, Veron & Associes, for sending in the judgment, summary and translation in English A patentee who has obtained an interim injunction from a court to […]
READ MOREPosted: February 21st, 2012
H. Lundbeck A/S v. Alfred e. & CO. Tiefenbacher GmbH, Ratiopharm GmbH, Ratiopharm Belgium N.V and Teva Pharma Belgium N.V., Court of Appeal Brussels, Belgium, 14 February 2012, Case No. 2011/AR/2821, with thanks to Steven Cattoor, Hoyng Monegier, for providing the case and a head note. As reported earlier (see here), on 3 October 2011 […]
READ MOREPosted: February 21st, 2012
MedImmune Limited v Novartis Pharmaceuticals (UK) Limited & another, High Court, 3 February 2012, Case No. HC11C01304, Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 181 (Pat) On Friday 11 February 2012, Mr Justice Arnold handed down his second judgment in the ongoing litigation between MedImmune and Novartis. In his first judgment in July 2011 (which may be […]
READ MOREPosted: February 21st, 2012
AstraZeneca AB v. Krka Sverige AB, District Court of Stockholm, 4 February 2011, Docket No. T 16565-10AstraZeneca raised a patent infringement claim against Krka's product Esomeprazol Krka and requested an injunction and damages as well as a search order for further evidence of the alleged infringement in October 2011. The circumstances are that Krka was […]
READ MOREPosted: February 16th, 2012
EPO, Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.07, decision of January 30, 2012, to be published in OJ EPO – Zenon Technology Partnership v. Siemens Industry, Inc. In these times of mergers and acquisitions, representatives in proceedings before the EPO sometimes lose track of who is the true party to the proceedings. A good example is the […]
READ MOREPosted: February 14th, 2012
Novartis v. Mylan, Supreme Court (“Hof van Cassatie/Court de Cassation”), Belgium, 5 January 2012, Docket number C.11.0101.N, The Belgian Supreme Court has confirmed an earlier decision of the Brussels court of appeal whereby Novartis saw its claim for a preliminary injunction against Mylan’s intended commercialisation of a generic sustained release formulation of fluvastatin granted. In […]
READ MORE