Novartis v. Johnson & Johnson, District Court The Hague (Rechtbank Den Haag), 11 February 2009

hammer

Lack of novelty by re-working prior art requires that the re-works must inevitably lead to results falling within the claim of the patent at issue. If choices have to be made for the re-working process, the result is not inevitable.A possible breach of Article 84 EPC (clarity) does not lead to nullity. The Court states that an incorrect formula in the claims does not lead to violation of Article 83 EPC if a person skilled in art can still use the patent without undue burden. Furthermore the Court states that to successfully claim partial priority according to Article 88 (3) EPC, it is sufficient that the priority document discloses ‘elements of’ the patent.

The full summary of this case has been posted on Kluwer IP Law.

 

 

Comments (0)
Your email address will not be published.
Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published.
Clear all
Become a contributor!
Interested in contributing? Submit your proposal for a blog post now and become a part of our legal community! Contact Editorial Guidelines
Image
AI Assistant on Kluwer IP Law's Manual IP
Image
Whitepaper

Book Ad List

Books
book1
Vissers Annotated European Patent Convention 2024 Edition
Kaisa Suominen, Nina Ferara, Peter de Lange, Andrew Rudge
€105.00
AIPPI
Experimental Use and Bolar Exemptions
David Gilat, Charles A. Boulakia, Daphné Derouane & Ralph Nack
€190.00
book2
Annotated PCT
Malte Köllner
€160.00