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 On appeal, the patent -while using the problem/solution and could/would approach- was revoked due to lack of inventive step.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 […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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. […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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) […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
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 […]
READ MORE
EMAIL US
