SEARCH RESULTS

NL – IKSL B.V. v PTI BVBA

Crocodile IKSL B.V.v. PTI BVBA, ex parte provisional seizure, District Court Amsterdam, 17 February 2010, Case No. 451576 / KG RK 10-680
IKSL B.V. requested leave to provisionally seize

FOUND IN: BLOG

CEIPI – ‘Towards a European Patent Court’

“The Center for International Intellectual Property Studies (CEIPI) on 16 and 17 April 2010 holds a conference at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on the topic: “Towards

FOUND IN: BLOG

UK / DE / EPO – Recent relevant cases

A set of recent relevant EPO, German and UK cases, inlcuding extended summaries (listed below) has been added to the blog. The posts are published on the date of the judgment. With thanks to Tilmann Müller-Stoy, Bardehle & Pagenberg and Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons.   UK – Generics v Daiichi / AppealUK […]

FOUND IN: BLOG

EPO – Benoît Battistelli (France) elected EPO President

In June 2009, the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation initiated proceedings for the election of Ms Brimelow’s successor as President of the European Patent Office. Four candidates fulfilled the formal requirements for an application but in the following regular meetings of the Council none of the candidates was able to collect the necessary […]

FOUND IN: BLOG

EU – Council Resolution on the enforcement of IP rights in the IM

Council Resolution of 1 March 2010 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market
“The Council of the European Union, […] stresses, in the context of the establishment and functioning of the internal market, the importance of using all appropriate means

FOUND IN: BLOG

EU – Kirin Amgen / Opinion A-G re SPC

Kirin Amgen v. Lithuania, Court of Justice, preliminary question, SPC, opinion A-G Bot, 25 February 2010, Case No. C-66/09
Kirin Amgen applied for an ABC for Aranesp in Lithuania based on its EU Marketing Authorisation (MA) (granted according to Reg. 2309/93) while it did not have a national MA in Lithuania. Article 19a(e) of Regulation 1768/92 stipulates that

FOUND IN: BLOG

SE – Vanserum Vision AB v. SICK IVP AB / Invalidity and Infringement

Vanserum Vision AB v. SICK IVP AB, Stockholm District Court, Stockholm , Sweden, 5 February 2010, Cases No. T 1966-07 and T 22033-07 (joint cases)

FOUND IN: BLOG

BE – Du Pont et al. v. Mylan / Losartan SPC (Appeal)

Du Pont et al. / Mylan, Losartan SPC, decision in summary proceedings (appeal), Brussels Court of Appeal, 23 February 2010, Case No. A.R. nr. 2010/KR/53
According to the Brussels Court of Appeal, the scope of protection of the SPC for the active ingredient Losartan does not, at first sight (“prima facie”), extend to a generic version of the medicinal product Cozaar Plus® (containing the active ingredients Losartan and HCTZ) under Article 4 of the SPC-Regulation. The main reason raised by the court is that, s

FOUND IN: BLOG

UK – Intervet UK Limited v Merial & Others

Intervet UK Limited v Merial & Others, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, London, UK, 23 February 2010, Case No. [2010] EWHC 294 (Pat), with thanks to Richard Willoughby, Howrey
Today, the approved judgment of Mr Justice Arnold has been published regarding the UK aspect of a number of associated actions concerning the Defendant’s European patent entitled “Method for the in vitro diagnosis of type II porcine circovirus infection and diagnostic reagents” (the “Patent”). In summary, the Defendants alleged that Intervet had infringed claim 18 of the Patent

FOUND IN: BLOG

EPO – Enlarged Board of Appeal decides on dosage regime – Swiss-type claims no longer available

EPO, Enlarged Board of Appeal, 19 February 2010, Decision No. G 02/08 – Dosage regime/ABBOT RESPIRATORY
The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) answered the questions referred to it in T 1319/04 (OJ EPO 2009, 36) as follows:
Question 1:
Where it is already known to use a medicament to treat an illness

FOUND IN: BLOG