Posted: July 11th, 2014
Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v Nintendo of Europe GmbH, London, UK, 20 June 2014, Case No. [2014] EWHC 1959 (Pat) This case concerned validity and infringement of three patents owned by Philips. The first patent claimed a means of controlling the movement of a virtual body in a computer-generated virtual environment; the other two patents […]
READ MOREPosted: July 11th, 2014
Ferring International Center S.A. v. Medac Gesellschaft für klinische Spezialpräparate GMbH and Gebro Pharma GmbH, Medac Gesellschaft für klinische Spezialpräparate GMbH v. Ferring International Center S.A, Svea Court of Appeal, Sweden, 28 January 2013, Docket No. T 3508-11 On appeal of a District Court of Stockholm judgment in joint infringement and invalidity proceedings previously reported […]
READ MOREPosted: June 25th, 2014
Future New Developments Ltd. v. B&S Patente und Marke GmbH, High Court of Justice, London, UK, 9 June 2014, Case No IP 14 M 00027 The UK court has held that participation by a German entity in prior proceedings before the UK Intellectual Property Office (that is, the UK patent office) meant that the Germany […]
READ MOREPosted: June 25th, 2014
In the recent Samsung v. Apple case the Intellectual property high court on May 16, 2014 determined that the enforcement of a FRAND pledged patent right -with a claim of damages- did not constitute an abuse of right if the amount of damages claimed is within the scope of the license fee, by Miyamura Daisuke, […]
READ MOREPosted: June 17th, 2014
MBI Co. Ltd. v. Shimano Inc et al, District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 18 June 2014, Case No. HA ZA 13-745 The scope of protection of a patent is determined by a 'context-driven' reading of a patent. In this reading, equivalents are taken into account. A further relying on equivalency is limited to cases […]
READ MOREPosted: June 6th, 2014
Ian Alexander Shanks v. Unilever, High Court of England and Wales, Patents Court (Arnold J), London, UK, 23 May 2014, Case No. [2014] EWHC 1647 (Pat) In its judgment of 23 May 2014 the High Court of England and Wales decided a case regarding an employee’s claim for compensation in respect of patents concerning devices […]
READ MOREPosted: June 5th, 2014
Ruma Rubber B.V. v. Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij B.V., District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 4 June 2014, Case. No. C/09/407089 / HA ZA 11-2660 Reclaiming of patent rights. In view of the terms of the contract between parties, Ruma can not (re)claim Shell's patent rights. Procedural costs: In view of the Bericap caselaw, proceedings […]
READ MOREPosted: June 2nd, 2014
Topkip v. Storteboom, District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 2 April 2014, Case no.: C/09/443124 HA ZA 13-571 Topkip develops and trades in poultry slaughter lines. Topkip owns European Patent EP 1 280 426 for a ‘Method for cooling slaughtered poultry’ (the “Patent”). Compared to the prior art, the Patent aims to improve cooling of […]
READ MOREPosted: June 2nd, 2014
Novartis AG v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (Europe) BV, preliminary injunction case before the District Court of The Hague, the Netherlands, 12 May 2014, case number C/09/460540 / KG ZA 14-185 A predecessor of Novartis invented the biphosphate zoledronic acid, used for oncological medications. Novartis created a product with zoledronic acid as the active ingredient, which […]
READ MORE