EPLAW PATENT BLOG

ES – LICONSA v. BOEHRINGER

Posted: October 23rd, 2019

LICONSA v. BOEHRINGER, Court of Appeals of Barcelona, 29 March 2019, Docket No. 1076/2017 / Request for limitation of a patent before the Spanish Patent & Trademark Office (SPTO) during judicial proceedings In a decision dated 29 March 2019, the Court of Appeals of Barcelona made clear that, since the entry into force of the […]

READ MORE

CH – Irreparable harm discussion sparks a new debate in Switzerland

Posted: October 11th, 2019

Irreparable harm discussion sparks a new debate in Switzerland, by Simon Holzer and Kilian Schärli, Meyerlustenberger Lachenal Ltd. (MLL) In Switzerland, by tradition, the requirements for showing not easily reparable harm in order to obtain a preliminary injunction in patent matters have never been very high. This may be because in Switzerland ex-parte injunctions are […]

READ MORE

NO – Standard of proof when ascertaining the contents of oral disclosure

Posted: August 24th, 2019

Norcape Biotechnology AS (Norcape) v. the Norwegian Board of Appeal for Intellectual Property Rights (Board of Appeal), Courts of Appeal Oslo, Norway, 22 July 2019, Case No.: LB-2018-72158-2 In May 2004, Norcape filed a patent registration for two products and one process concerning animal feed made of waste products from fish. The claimed invention combined […]

READ MORE

UK – APPLICATION TO STAY UK PATENT INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS PENDING EPO OPPOSITION REFUSED

Posted: August 7th, 2019

Coloplast A/S v Salts Healthcare Limited, UK Patents Court , 3 July 2019 Coloplast is the proprietor of a patent entitled “comfort layer for a collecting bag” relating to collecting bags (ostomy products for human waste). Coloplast claims their patent is infringed by Salts’ “Confidence BE” range of ostomy bags in the UK – initially […]

READ MORE

SE – Preliminary injunctions in patent cases – update from Sweden

Posted: July 21st, 2019

Preliminary injunctions in patent cases – what is required for it to be found likely that a granted patent will not hold up in an assessment as to whether it is invalid? By Hanna Tilus, Roschier and Hampus Rystedt, Zacco  A preliminary injunction may be awarded in a patent case where the claimant is able […]

READ MORE

NL – HE Licenties v. VG Colours

Posted: July 18th, 2019

HE Licenties B.V. vs. VG Colours B.V., District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands,  19 June 2019, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:6407 Introduction HE Licenties B.V. (”HE Licenties”) is a wholesaler of flowers and plants and, more in particular, colored orchids (and licensor of related technology). VG Colours B.V. (”VG Colours”) is involved in, among other things, the artificial […]

READ MORE

UK – Pfizer v. Roche

Posted: July 9th, 2019

Pfizer Ltd v F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG & Anor [2019] EWHC 1520 (Pat) In a High Court judgment handed down at the end of June, Birss J refused Pfizer’s request for so-called “Arrow” declaratory relief in relation to five of Roche’s drug combination patents covering bevacizumab (marketed by Roche as Avastin). Pfizer intend to launch […]

READ MORE

UK – Napp v. Sandoz

Posted: July 3rd, 2019

UK Court considers whether it can fortify a cross-undertaking for damages after the injunction has been discharged Sandoz Limited (Sandoz) (Second Defendant) applied to the court for fortification (requiring a payment to be made into court) of a cross-undertaking given by Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Limited (Napp) (Claimant) in respect of an injunction restraining the launch […]

READ MORE

UK – UK HIGH COURT SETS TRIAL DATE FOR RAND TRIAL BEFORE JUDGMENT ON TECHNICAL TRIALS HANDED DOWN

Posted: June 26th, 2019

TQ Delta, LLC v Zyxel Communications UK Ltd & others [2019] EWHC 353 (Pat) This is a judgment in a preliminary dispute concerned the setting of a trial date for the determination of RAND licence terms in a case where the technical trial of the two telecommunications patents had already been heard by the court, […]

READ MORE