EPLAW PATENT BLOG

DE – Standards and FRAND

Posted: February 27th, 2009

Infringement proceedings (Standards and FRAND), Mannheim Regional Court, Germany, 27 February 2009, Case No.: 7 O 94/08 The declaration by the owner of a patent vis-à-vis a standardisation organisation to grant a licence to any interested party at conditions which are fair, reasonable and not discriminating is not in rem disposition over the patent, but […]

READ MORE

DE – Infringement / Patent Troll

Posted: February 27th, 2009

Infringement proceedings (patent troll), Mannheim Regional Court, Germany, 27 February 2009, Case No.: 7 O 94/08
Even a patent licensing company which does not produce or sell patented products has a right to injunctive relief vis-à-vis third parties if there is a patent infringement. It is neither harassment

READ MORE

DE – Mannheim / determining validity before expiry of opposition time limit

Posted: February 27th, 2009

Infringement proceedings (preliminary injunction), Mannheim Regional Court, 27 February 2009, Case No.: 7 O 29/09
As a rule the validity which has to be determined positively for a preliminary cease-and-desist order may not be ascertained on the basis of a patent which

READ MORE

UK – Generics (UK) Limited and others v H Lundbeck A/S – House of Lords

Posted: February 25th, 2009

Generics (UK) Limited and others (Appellants) v H Lundbeck A/S (Respondents), House of Lords, UK, Case No. [2009] UKHL 12, with thanks to Marc Döring and Kevin Mooney, Simmons & Simmons
The Court of Appeal decision in Generics (UK) Limited v Lundbeck A/S followed

READ MORE

UK – James Duncan Kelly v. GE Health Care / Employee invention

Posted: February 11th, 2009

James Duncan Kelly and Kwok Wai Chiu v. GE Health Care Limited,High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, 11 February 2009, Case No. [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat), with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowen Freeland, Simmons & Simmons

READ MORE

FR – Agilent & Hewlett- Packard v. Waters

Posted: January 14th, 2009

Agilent Technologies Deutschland GmbH and Hewlett-Packard GmbH v. Waters Corporation and Waters SAS, calculation of damages, Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, France, 14 January 2009, Docket No. 97/20725, with thanks to Pierre Véron, Véron & Associés The compensation granted to the patentee for the loss of profit caused by the infringement may be calculated on […]

READ MORE

UK – Generics (UK) Ltd v. Daiichi Pharmaceutical

Posted: October 15th, 2008

Generics (UK) Ltd v. Daiichi Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd and Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, 15 October 2008, with thanks to Marc Döring, Simmons & Simmons
The English Patents Court’s decisions in Dr Reddy’s v Eli Lilly

READ MORE

UK – Dr Reddy’s Laboratories (UK) Ltd v. Eli Lilly

Posted: October 13th, 2008

Dr Reddy's Laboratories (UK) Ltd v. Eli Lilly and Company Limited, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, 13 October 2008, Case No. [2008] EWHC 2345 (Pat), with thanks to Marc Döring, Simmons & Simmons The English Patents Court's decisions in Dr Reddy's v Eli Lilly (Floyd J – 13 October 2008) and Generics […]

READ MORE

UK – Conor Medsystems Incorporated v. Angiotech Pharmaceuticals

Posted: July 9th, 2008

Conor Medsystems Incorporated v. Angiotech Pharmaceuticals Incorporated and others, 9 July 2008, Case No. [2008] UKHL 49, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons
The decision clarifies the approach towards identifying the “inventive concept” in a patent claim and represents a move away from “obvious to try” as a test for obviousness.

READ MORE

UK – Actavis v. Merck / Dosage Regimes

Posted: May 21st, 2008

Actavis UK Limited v. Merck & Co Inc, Court of Appeal (Civil Division) London, UK, 21 May 2008, Case No. [2008] EWCA Civ 444, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons

READ MORE