NL – Coloplast v. Hollister / No Cassation

Posted: November 27th, 2019

Coloplast A/S v. Medical4You, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 22 November 2019, Case No. ECLI:NL:HR:2019:1833 Coloplast holds European patent EP 1 145 729 with regard to a ready-to-use urinary catheter assembly. On appeal, the patent -while using the problem/solution and could/would approach- was revoked due to lack of inventive step. Coloplast now appeals to the […]


NL – VG Colours v. HE Licenties and Hanson Uitgevers

Posted: November 22nd, 2019

VG Colours B.V. vs. HE Licenties B.V. and Hanson Uitgevers B.V., Provisions Judge of the District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands, 11 October 2019, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:11479 Hanson Uitgevers B.V. is the owner of Dutch national patent NL 1040904 (”NL 904”) entitled ”Substance introduction method for plant and plant obtained therewith”, HE Licenties B.V. holds an […]


NL – Tomra Sorting Limited v. Kiremko

Posted: November 21st, 2019

Tomra Sorting Limited v. Kiremko, District Court The Hague, 15 November 2019, Case no. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:12109 Infringement proceedings instigated by patent holder Tomra. The Judge holds that there is a serious, non negligible chance that the patent will be revoked in proceedings on the merits, as prior art GB 119 implicitly, but clearly and unambiguously discloses […]


EPO – New edition Guidelines for Search and Examination at the EPO

Posted: November 18th, 2019

The Guidelines for Search and Examination at the EPO as PCT Authority give instructions on the practice and procedure to be followed in various aspects of the handling of international applications before the EPO as International Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority. They apply as from 1 November 2019. The Guidelines can be found […]


NL – Gilead vs. Dutch Patent Office – SPC tenofovir / emtricitabine

Posted: November 13th, 2019

Gilead vs. Dutch Patent Office (tenofovir / emtricitabine), District Court of The Hague 30 October 2019 Introduction The plaintiff in this matter, Gilead Sciences Inc. (“Gilead”), markets a medicinal product under the name Truvada. As many European patent practitioners will know, this product consists of a combination of the active ingredients tenofovir dispoproxil and emtricitabine. […]


EU – EP Paper: CJEU case law does not expressly exclude the possibility to allow a non -EU Member State to form part of the UPCA

Posted: November 8th, 2019

EU Patent and Brexit, In-Depth Analysis, Requested by the JURI committee, November 2019 A paper requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs and commissioned, overseen and published by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, concludes amongst other things that CJEU case law does not expressly exclude the possibility to allow […]


CH – Lilly v. Sandoz – Pemetrexed, Invalidity Action rejected

Posted: November 4th, 2019

In October 15, 2019, the Swiss Federal Patent Court held in Eli Lilly vs. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals that the Swiss part of Eli Lilly’s patent EP 1 313 508 B1 regarding the use of the anti-cancer drug pemetrexed in combination with a vitamin B12 is valid – almost to the day two years after the Swiss […]


UK – Anan Kasei & Rhodia Operations v. Neo Chemicals and Oxides

Posted: October 29th, 2019

Anan Kasei Co. Ltd & Rhodia Operations S.A.S. v Neo Chemicals and Oxides Limited & Neo Performance Materials Inc, Court of Appeal, London, 9 October 2019, [2019] EWCA Civ 1646 In this judgment, the Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Neo Chemicals and Oxides (Europe) Limited (previously Molycorp Chemicals and Oxides (Europe) Limited) […]


DE – Sufficiency of Disclosure and Enablement

Posted: October 28th, 2019

Sufficiency of Disclosure and Enablement German Federal Court of Justice, judgment dated January 8, 2019 – docket no. X ZR 58/17 In its judgment dated January 8, 2019, docket no. X ZR 58/17, the German Federal Court of Justice consolidates its previous case law regarding the requirements of a clear and complete disclosure of an […]


UK – A Formstein objection in the UK?

Posted: October 25th, 2019

A Formstein objection in the UK? by Paul England, Taylor Wessing As is now well-known, in Actavis v Eli Lilly ([2017] UKSC 48) the UK Supreme Court held that direct infringement cannot be determined solely by whether a product or process falls within the language of the claim. Instead, whether variants falling outside the language […]