The Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) held that where a defendant in a patent infringement action has been found to be liable for infringement in a decision that is preliminarily enforceable but subject…
The FCJ held that the priority of an earlier application may be rightfully claimed if the technical information described for a specific embodiment or otherwise in in the application is seen by the…
The Stockholm District Court found that the product did not fall under the wording of the patent claim or the doctrine of equivalence. During the application procedure before EPO, the patent holder…
The FCJ held that legal provisions in force at the priority date must be taken into consideration when assessing novelty and inventive step of an invention. These legal provisions may incite the…
The Court of Appeal held that the esomeprazole salt in Krka's product with an optical purity of 98.8 - 99.5 % e.e. (enantiomeric excess) was an “optically pure compound” as claimed in AstraZeneca's…
The Bolar exemption must be interpreted narrowly in order not to affect the patent holder's exclusive rights. The privilege of the generic drug manufacturers who are allowed to conduct clinical…
The Oslo District Court held that Jets AS' patent for a liquid seal pump of the helical screw type for use in vacuum drainage systems lacked novelty over one of Jets' own patents. Despite the court’s…
a) The applicant is not obliged to limit the protective scope to explicitly described embodiments, but may make certain generalisations to cover the entire invention.
b) Whether a claim containing…
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…
