Comments on: The Losartan Case in Belgium: One SPC Too Far? http://kluwerpatentblog.com/2010/04/28/the-losartan-case-in-belgium-one-spc-too-far/ Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:28:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Anika Stevens http://kluwerpatentblog.com/2010/04/28/the-losartan-case-in-belgium-one-spc-too-far/comment-page-1/#comment-25565 Anika Stevens Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:39:35 +0000 http://kluwerpatentblog.com/?p=637#comment-25565 Although I will not pretend to know anything about medical patents, I'm curious about this case since there are two conflicting results. As someone from the working class, even if Merck and Du Pont may have valid claims on their petition, I want to agree with the Brussels decision. Having generic brands for a certain medicine can be very helpful to the mass. Although I will not pretend to know anything about medical patents, I’m curious about this case since there are two conflicting results. As someone from the working class, even if Merck and Du Pont may have valid claims on their petition, I want to agree with the Brussels decision. Having generic brands for a certain medicine can be very helpful to the mass.

]]> By: Howard Rosenberg http://kluwerpatentblog.com/2010/04/28/the-losartan-case-in-belgium-one-spc-too-far/comment-page-1/#comment-14 Howard Rosenberg Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:15:47 +0000 http://kluwerpatentblog.com/?p=637#comment-14 Hi Kristof, You may remember me when I was at Merck Generics, I'm now a Scientific Advisor at US law firm Frommer, Lawrence and Haug LLP but based in UK. In my view the Belgian court is correct. The French decision I suspect may well be a throw back to the original French national CCP assessment where different strengths and formulations could obtain extensions based on specific claims, which often then became 'detached' from the product concerned and blocked related products even when the related product had separate patent family. Hi Kristof, You may remember me when I was at Merck Generics, I’m now a Scientific Advisor at US law firm Frommer, Lawrence and Haug LLP but based in UK.

In my view the Belgian court is correct. The French decision I suspect may well be a throw back to the original French national CCP assessment where different strengths and formulations could obtain extensions based on specific claims, which often then became ‘detached’ from the product concerned and blocked related products even when the related product had separate patent family.

]]>