Posted: June 21st, 2019
Case: C-354/19 “In order to determine whether an SPC may be granted, it is necessary to apply Article 3(c) of Regulation No 469/2009 and Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1610/96. However, the interpretation of those provisions in a case such as the present appears unclear, particularly in view of the fact that the application of […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 21st, 2019
Eli Lilly and Company v. Fresenius Kabi Nederland B.V., District Court The Hague, 19 June 2019, Case no. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:6107 Contrary to the Court of Appeal in summary proceedings, and contrary to various foreign decisions in parallel proceedings, the District Court of the Hague rules in the case on the merits that the scope of protection […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 18th, 2019
Sandoz B.V. v. Astrazeneca AB, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Opinion Advocate General Van Peursem, 10 May 2019, Case No. ECLI:NL:PHR:2019:608 Astrazeneca holds patent EP 1250138 relating to a fulvestrant formulation. A product with fulvestrant is marketed by Astrazeneca under the name FASLODEX and is used for the treatment of oestrogen hormone dependent breast cancers. […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 12th, 2019
*** UPDATE *** As expected, it was confirmed yesterday that the exception will enter into force on 1 July 2019. From the press release: “The EU is taking measures to foster the competitiveness of EU producers of generic medicines and biosimilar products. The Council today adopted a regulation which introduces an exception to the […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 12th, 2019
Interpretation of a patent claim in differentiation from the prior art – Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 27.11.2018, X ZR 16/17 – Scheinwerferbelüftungssystem In its decision, the Federal Court of Justice deals with the interpretation of a patent claim in distinction from the state of the art cited by the patent description. Accordingly, when […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 6th, 2019
In its decision of 4 June 2019, the tenth senate of the Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) confirmed a rejection of an application for a preliminary compulsory license for a cholesterol-lowering drug. It is just the second time that the FCJ had to deal with the questions of a compulsory licence. The first case concerning […]
READ MORE
Posted: June 4th, 2019
(1) Evalve Inc. (2) Abbot Cardiovascular Systems Inc. (3) Abbot Medical UK Limited v Edwards Lifesciences Limited, Patents Court, London, UK, 3rd May 2019, [2019] EWHC 1158 (Pat) This judgment from Henry Carr J disposed of an interim injunction application by the Claimants (collectively “Abbot”) against the Defendant (“Edwards”). Abbot had alleged infringement of two […]
READ MORE
Posted: May 31st, 2019
Mobile Sanitary Solutions B.V. v. TWT Verhuur B.V., court of Appeal The Hague, The Netherlands, 28 May 2019, Case no. ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2019:1182 MSS holds EP 2 780 515 entitled ‘Mobile sanitary unit for accommodating at least three sanitary facilities’. The Court of Appeal like the Judge in first instance rules that here is a serious, non […]
READ MORE
Posted: May 29th, 2019
Research Handbook on Patent Law and Theory, Second Edition, Research Handbooks in Intellectual Property series, Elgar, edited by Toshiko Takenaka From the publisher: “This significantly updated second edition of the Research Handbook on Patent Law and Theory provides comprehensive coverage of new research for patent protection in three major jurisdictions: the United States, Europe and […]
READ MORE
Posted: May 28th, 2019
Tata Steel IJmuiden v. ArcelorMittal, Dutch Supreme Court, Opinion Advocate General, 19 April 2019, Case No. ECLI:NL:PHR:2019:510 This case concerns the scope of EP 0044 held by ArcelorMittal and relating to ‘Clad hot-rolled and cold-rolled steel sheet, presenting a very high resistance after thermal treatment’. EP 044 states in the claims that the lower threshold for […]
READ MORE
EMAIL US
