A supplementary protection certificate SPC granted for an enantiomer (escitalopram) cannot be declared void because a prior SPC was granted for the racemate (citalopram) when both the racemate and…
By Giovanni Gozzo and David Nilsson
The Svea Court of Appeal partially invalidated the patent of respondent Dustcontrol, insofar as claim 1 of the patent was concerned. The Court held that it could…
The proprietor of a patent who has granted an exclusive license to a third party, has the right - in case of patent infringement - to assert its own claims against the infringer if said proprietor…
"Danger of delay" is not a requirement for the issuance of an ex parte inspection order. The inspection order need not to be filed immediately after the patent owner has acquired knowledge that the…
The Danish Supreme Court upheld the Maritime and Commercial Court's decision revoking an injunction against Teva issued by the Danish High Court. The Supreme Court ruled that a condition for the…
Contrary to the decision of the Opposition Division issued two weeks later, the District Court of The Hague held Novozymes’ patent to be novel and inventive. It also held the patent indirectly…
The Federal Institute of Intellectual Property can also issue a supplementary protection certificate to an applicant if a certificate for the same active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) or…
The difference between "inventiveness" within the meaning of the Austrian Patent Act and "inventive step" within the meaning of the Austrian Utility Model Act is too small to distinguish between…
The opponent relied on a document that was distributed in a meeting arranged by himself. The Board of Appeal held that in the present case, it did not share the view of the patentee that it was…
