EPLAW PATENT BLOG

NL – CDVI v. Impro / Appeal

Posted: September 24th, 2020

CDVI v. Impro, Court of Appeal of The Hague, the Netherlands, 23 June 2020, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2020:1622 Facts Construction Diffusion Vente Internationale SA (“CDVI”) is a global supplier of access systems and electronic locks. Access & Beyond B.V., formerly Impro Technologies Europe B.V. (“Impro”), is a distributor of Impro branded products such as security equipment and systems […]

READ MORE

DE – Eli Lilly v. various generics / validity (pemetrexed)

Posted: July 11th, 2020

With judgment dated 7 July 2020 (docket no. X ZR 150/18), the German Federal Court of Justice found the German part of Lilly’s patent EP 1 313 508 valid and dismissed the judgment of the German Federal Patent Court which had held in 2018 that Lilly’s patent lacked inventive step. The reasoned decision is not […]

READ MORE

CH – Lilly vs. Sandoz – Pemetrexed: Swiss Federal Supreme Court rejects Sandoz’ Appeal

Posted: June 26th, 2020

On 1 May 2020, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court fully rejected Sandoz’ appeal against the decision of the Swiss Federal Patent Court (FPC) in Eli Lilly vs. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals (dated October 15, 2019) holding that the Swiss part of Eli Lilly’s patent EP 1 313 508 B1 regarding the use of the anti-cancer drug pemetrexed […]

READ MORE

UK – Geofabrics v. Fiberweb Geosynthetics

Posted: May 20th, 2020

Geofabrics Limited v Fiberweb Geosynthetics Limited [2020] EWHC 444 (Par) (5 March 2020) In this judgment Mr. David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) held that Geofabrics Limited’s patent entitled “trackbed liner and related methods” is valid and infringed by Fiberweb Geosynthetics Limited’s product, Hydrotex 2.0. Background Geofabrics Limited (“Geofabrics”) is the proprietor […]

READ MORE

UK – MEXICHEM UK LIMITED v HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC

Posted: April 22nd, 2020

The recent Court of Appeal judgment in Mexichem UK Ltd v Honeywell International Inc [2020] EWCA Civ 473 has upheld the first instance decision of Hacon J refusing to strike out Mexichem’s requests for Arrow declarations in relation to Honeywell’s patents and patent applications. An Arrow declaration is a negative declaration made by the Court […]

READ MORE

UK – IPCom v. Vodafone

Posted: February 18th, 2020

IPCOM GMBH & CO KG v VODAFONE GROUP PLC and others Over the past 13 years, IPCom has been asserting its portfolio of telecoms patents against various companies in the telecoms sector. In this recent decision in proceedings against Vodafone, IPCom has had its patent found valid, essential and infringed by aspects of Vodafone’s 4G […]

READ MORE

UK – Conversant v. Apple

Posted: January 21st, 2020

Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v Apple Retail UK Limited & Ors [2019] EWHC 3266 (Pat) The Patents Court has handed down a decision revoking Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. (“Conversant”)’s United Kingdom patent GB 2 365 712 entitled “Computing device with improved user interface for applications” (the “Patent”) on the basis that it was obvious. The […]

READ MORE

UK – Koninklijke Philips v. Asustek Computer / Appeal

Posted: January 14th, 2020

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v Asustek Computer Inc [2019] EWCA Civ 2230 (17 December 2019) In this judgment the Court of Appeal (Floyd LJ giving the only judgment) upheld the decisions of the Patents Court on the validity of three patents owned by the Claimant, Koninklijke Philips (‘Philips’). Arnold J (as he then was) had previously […]

READ MORE

NL – Philips v. Asus / Appeal EP 659

Posted: January 10th, 2020

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Asustek Computer Inc. Asus Europe B.V. and Asus Holland B.V. , Court of Appeal The Hague, The Netherlands, 24 December 2019, Case no. ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2019:3427 Philips holds various patents in the field of UMTS technology, amongst which EP 659. In first instance, Philips tried to obtain an injunction against Asus, but the […]

READ MORE