On 30 January 2014 the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) handed down two Decisions in response to two preliminary rulings sought by the same Greek Court that referred the questions answered by the CJEU in its Judgment of 18 July 2013 (Case C‑414/11, Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v DEMO Anonimos Viomikhaniki kai Emporiki Etairia Farmakon). In this case, the Greek Court, which was hearing a matter involving a patent that had been granted on 21 October 1986, sought the guidance of the CJEU on whether under Articles 27 and 70 of the TRIPs Agreement a patent protecting a process to obtain a pharmaceutical product would protect the product as such after t [...]
The board held that a document of speculative nature could not objectively be considered as a realistic starting point or the most promising springboard towards the claimed invention: the document was no more than a speculative review of what might be potentially feasible in the future and no concrete realization of the claimed type of product was described therein.
On Friday, 21 February 2014, the Danish Government announced its plans to establish a local division of the UPC in Copenhagen if the Danish referendum on Denmark’s accession to the UPC should turn out positive.
The decision is the result of a political agreement with almost all Danish parties represented in parliament and is widely seen as a counter-move to address concerns voiced by parties in opposition to Denmark’s accession to the UPC. Danish UPC sceptics have expressed concerns in relation to Danish SMEs being forced to conduct proceedings in foreign jurisdictions – not just as plaintiffs, but – perhaps more importantly – as defendants (which, by far, would appear to the role in whi [...]
The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of the High Court (Arnold J) that claims concerning treatment of osteoporosis with zoledronic acid were not entitled to an earlier priority date and were therefore invalid over an intervening publication. The Court held that the disclosure in the priority document was either too general or too specific, and therefore did not support a claim to the use of zoledronic acid administered intravenously about once a year to treat osteoporosis with a dose of 2-10mg.
Many practitioners in Germany thought the doctrine of equivalence to be rather at its end following two Supreme Court (BGH)-decisions in 2011 (“Okklusionsvorrichtung” and “Dyglycidverbindung”). Now, the renowned Higher Regional Court Duesseldorf has – in my eyes, correctly – made clear that the old dog is still alive.
According to standard practice of the BGH, equivalence has three prerequisites: (i) an identical effect attributed to the alternative means; (ii) perceptibility of the alternative solution for the skilled person; and (iii) equivalence in value.
The BGH uses the following formula to describe the third prerequisite (equivalence in value) in detail: The ref [...]
Earlier today, the Swiss Federal Courts (including the Swiss Federal Patent Court) published a joint press release concerning their annual reports 2013.
The number of infringement and/or validity cases submitted to the Federal Patent Court in its second year of operation corresponds to the expectations. In total, 22 ordinary proceedings on the merits and 11 summary proceedings were brought before the Court (this is an increase of almost 100% compared to the 17 new cases that had been filed with the Federal Patent Court in 2012).
The Court dealt with 23 cases in 2013. This means that the ratio between output and input is roughly 69%.
In its second business year, the Federal Patent Cour [...]