As readers know well, over the last few years courts around Europe have handed down several ground-breaking decisions on the scope of “second medical use” claims and, in particular, the activities required of third parties to guarantee the fair protection of such claims. Most of these decisions have revolved around the Lyrica® (pregabalin) patent, which…

Following the CJEU judgment Huawei vs ZTE (Case C-170/13) of 16 July 2015, the national courts continue refining the requirements for the assertion of standard-essential patents (SEPs). So far, the first instance courts in Germany (in particular in Duesseldorf, Mannheim and Munich) showed a tendency to apply the principles of the CJEU decision in a…

The German ratification proceedings concerning the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court (UPCA) have been formally started. According to German Rechtsanwalt Dr. Ingve Stjerna, the first hearing on the UPCA is planned to be held in the German Parliament on the evening (21:40) of 23 June 2016. Remarkably this is exactly the date that the Brexit referendum…

On 29 April 2016, the Australian Productivity Commission published a Draft Report on its enquiry into Australia’s Intellectual Property Arrangements. Although the Draft Report provides separate analyses on the state of copyright, patents, designs and trade marks, it arrives at a common conclusion:  Aussie IP needs work. “Not as effective as they could be” The…

Wolters Kluwer released a new title last week in the Information Law Series: The Inventiveness Requirement in Patent Law by Lodewijk Pessers. Pessers recently received his Ph.D. in this subject. We asked the author to briefly describe the book’s contents. By Lodewijk Pessers ‘The Inventiveness Requirement in Patent Law’ tries to answer the question of…

Swiss procedural law foresees the possibility to file a protective letter if someone believes it will be confronted with a request for ex-parte interim measures without being heard. The corresponding provision of the Swiss Civil Procedure Code (CPC) reads as follows: 1 Any person who has reason to believe that an ex-parte interim measure […]…

In a recent judgment of 2 February 2016, the Barcelona Court of Appeal (Section 15) was called on to interpret the scope of protection of what are known as “product-by-process” claims. One of the issues discussed by the parties was whether the scope of protection of claim 1 of patent EP 731.646 B1, which claims…

Let’s begin with the German statute and compare it with the EPC. Section 34 of the German Patent Act (GPA) stipulates the following: (3) An application shall contain: 1. the name of the applicant; 2. a request for the grant of a patent, in which the invention shall be clearly and concisely designated; 3. one…