EPLAW PATENT BLOG

UK – Nokia v. IPCom (GSM/UMTS)

Posted: January 18th, 2010

Nokia GmbH v. IPCom GmbH & Co. KG and IPCom GmbH & CO. KG v. Nokia UK Limited and Nokia OYJ (Nokia Corporation), Invalidity and infringement proceedings (GSM, UMTS), High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, The Hon Mr Justice Floyd, London, UK, 18 January 2010
These proceedings concern two patents in the name of IPCom GmbH and Co KG (“IPCom”). IPCom sued Nokia UK Limited and Nokia Oyj (Nokia Corporation) for infringement of both patents. The proceedings are part of a larger battle between

READ MORE

UK – Dr Reddy’s Laboratories v. Eli Lilly and Company Limited / Olanzapine

Posted: December 18th, 2009

Dr Reddy’s Laboratories (UK) Limited v. Eli Lilly and Company Limited, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), UK, 18 December 2009, Docket No: Case No.A3/2008/2966, with thanks to Robert Fitt, Bristows The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of Mr Justice Floyd and confirmed that Lilly’s (selection) patent concerning the drug olanzapine is valid. Olanzapine is […]

READ MORE

NL – Sharp v. Samsung / LCD Technology

Posted: December 16th, 2009

Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha (K.K.) v. Samsung Electronics Benelux B.V. and Samsung Electronics Europe Logistics B.V., infringement and invalidity proceedings, The Hague District Court, The Netherlands, 16 December 2009, Docket No. 317853 / HA ZA 08-2775 The District Court of The Hague invalidates claim 1 and 2 of the Dutch part of Sharps’ European patent on […]

READ MORE

UK – LEO Pharma v. Sandoz Limited / Appeal

Posted: November 17th, 2009

LEO Pharma A/S and LEO Laboratories Limited v. Sandoz Limited, invalidity proceedings, High Court of Justice, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), UK, 17 November 2009, Docket No. No: A3/2009/131, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons Unusual obviousness attack (that is, where the skilled person would have come upon the invention […]

READ MORE

UK – Generics v Daiichi / Appeal

Posted: July 2nd, 2009

Generics (UK) v Daiichi, Court of Appeal, London, UK, 2 July 2009, Case No. [2009] EWCA Civ 646, with thanks to Marc Döring, Simmons & Simmons In this case, the Court of Appeal has upheld the decision of Kitchin J that, although a course of action was obvious, the skilled person's motivation to pursue it […]

READ MORE

UK – LEO Pharma v. Sandoz Limited / First instance

Posted: May 15th, 2009

LEO Pharma A/S and LEO Laboratories Limited v. Sandoz Limited, invalidity proceedings, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Patents Court, UK, 15 May 2009, Docket No. HC08C00391, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons Sandoz unsuccessfully challenges Leo's patent on the basis that the claimed invasion is anticipated by and/or it […]

READ MORE

UK – Conor Medsystems Incorporated v. Angiotech Pharmaceuticals

Posted: July 9th, 2008

Conor Medsystems Incorporated v. Angiotech Pharmaceuticals Incorporated and others, 9 July 2008, Case No. [2008] UKHL 49, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons
The decision clarifies the approach towards identifying the “inventive concept” in a patent claim and represents a move away from “obvious to try” as a test for obviousness.

READ MORE

UK – Pozzoli SPA v BDMO / Obviousness

Posted: June 22nd, 2007

Pozzoli SPA v BDMO c.s., Court of Appeal, London, UK, 22 June 2007, Case No. [2007] EWCA Civ 588, with thanks to Marc Döring and Rowan Freeland, Simmons & Simmons
The English Court of Appeal has used a recent judgment to restate the approach of the English court towards the assessment of obviousness (

READ MORE