Posted: November 25th, 2020

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Wyeth LLC, District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 11 November 2020, Case No. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:11386

Wyeth holds EP 2 676 679, relating to “Formulations which stabilize and inhibit precipitation of immunogenic compositions”. MSD seeks to revoke EP ‘679 and succeeds. The Court rules that there is added matter that could not be directly and unambiguously derived from the original application.

A copy of the judgment can be read here.

[Further headnote follows]

One Response

  1. Attentive Observer says:

    Although the final word is not said in The Netherlands, it is worth noting that in the parallel running opposition proceedings the OD summoned for OP. In the annex to the summons, the OD comes to the conclusions that the claims as granted do not infringe Art 76(1) or 123(2). This could be the case for AR 2, but in general the OD considers that sufficiency, novelty and inventive step are given.

    It will be interesting to see how the opposition procedure before the EPO ends.

Leave a Reply to Attentive Observer