Unified Patent Court: UK to be a member during Brexit transition – OUT-LAW.com

Posted August 10th, 2018 in courts, international courts, news, patents by sally

‘The UK government has revealed that a deal was struck earlier this year to enable the UK to participate in the new Unified Patent Court (UPC) system during any Brexit implementation period that might apply.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 8th August 2018

Source: www.out-law.com

Patents: A P Racing Ltd v Alcon Components Ltd (#2) – NIPC Law

Posted June 26th, 2018 in appeals, news, patents by sally

‘This was an appeal by the claimant company, A P Racing Ltd (“AP”), against the decision of His Honour Judge Hacon in AP Racing Ltd v Alcon Components Ltd [2017] EWHC 248 (IPEC) (15 Feb 2017). His Honour held that one of 7 disk brake calipers manufactured by Alcon Components Ltd (“Alcon”) infringed UK patent no. GB 2,452,690 for a disc brake caliper body and a disc brake caliper comprising such a body but the other 6 did not. AP appealed against the finding of non-infringement in relation to 2 of Alcon’s calipers, CAR 1249 and CAR 37.’

Full Story

NIPC Law, 24th June 2018

Source: nipclaw.blogspot.com

Unitary patent and Unified Patent Court reforms: state of play May 2018 – OUT-LAW.com

Posted May 2nd, 2018 in courts, EC law, news, patents, treaties by tracey

‘The UK’s recent ratification of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement marked an important step towards a new system of unitary patent protection becoming operational. The process has been lengthy and complex and is not over yet.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 1st May 2018

Source: www.out-law.com

Obviousness – Hospira v Cubist Appeal – NIPC Law

Posted January 25th, 2018 in appeals, intellectual property, medicines, news, patents by tracey

‘Daptomycin is an antibiotic used to treat systemic and life-threatening infections caused by multiple drug resistant bacteria. Its effectiveness depends on its purity. The invention for which the patent in suit was granted was a way of purifying the antibiotic. In Hospira UK Ltd v Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC [2016] EWHC 1285 (Pat) (10 June 2016), Hospira UK Ltd, (a British subsidiary of Pfizer) sought the revocation of that patent. Mr Justice Henry Carr found that the patent was invalid and ordered its revocation. Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC (a subsidiary of Merck & Co.) appealed against that judgment and order in Hospira UK Ltd v Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC [2018] EWCA Civ 12 (18 Jan 2018).’

Full Story

NIPC Law, 24th January 2018

Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

Construction of Terms in Cross-Licensing Agreements: Koninklijke Philips N.V. v Asustek Computer Incorporation and Others – NIPC Law

‘In FRAND 8 Oct 2017 I discussed the terms upon which patents for inventions that are essential to a standard are licensed. I noted that courts around the world had held that those terms should be fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory – in other words, FRAND. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Koninklijke Philips N.V. v Asustek Computer Incorporation and Others [2017] EWCA Civ 1526 (11 Oct 2017) concerned the construction of a clause licensing such patents. It is important to note, however, that none of the judges who heard the appeal mentioned the acronym, FRAND, and it appeared only twice in the judgment of the trial judge.’

Full Story

NIPC Law, 13th October 2017

Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

FRAND – NIPC Law

Posted October 9th, 2017 in competition, EC law, inventions, licensing, news, patents, public interest, standards by sally

‘FRAND stands for “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory”. It refers to the terms upon which the owner of a patent for an invention that is essential to a standard (“standard essential patent” or “SEP”) should license its use.’

Full Story

NIPC Law, 8th October 2017

Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Eli Lilly v Actavis UK Ltd and Others: how to understand it and why it is important – NIPC Law

Posted July 14th, 2017 in cancer, competition, medicines, news, patents, Supreme Court by tracey

‘Supreme Court (Lords Neuberger, Mance, Clarke, Sumption and Hodge) Eli Lilly v Actavis UK Ltd and others [2017] UKSC 48 (12 July 2017)

What the Appeal was about
The pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly and Co (“Lilly”) has developed a drug called pemetrexed which it markets under the brand name Alimta for the treatment of various types of cancer. Used on its own, pemetrexed has unpleasant side effects that can sometimes be fatal but these can be avoided when it is administered as a compound called pemetrexed disodium in combination with vitamin B12.’

Full Story

NIPC Law, 13th July 2017

Source: nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

UK takes ‘final legislative step’ needed to ratify the Unified Patent Court reforms – OUT-LAW.com

Posted June 28th, 2017 in courts, news, patents, privilege, regulations by sally

‘A piece of legislation that UK law makers must pass so that the country can ratify a new Unified Patent Court (UPC) system in Europe has been laid before parliament.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 26th June 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v UCB Pharma SA and another; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v UCB Biopharma SPRL – WLR Daily

Posted June 15th, 2017 in conflict of laws, jurisdiction, law reports, licensing, patents by sally

Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v UCB Pharma SA and another; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v UCB Biopharma SPRL [2017] EWHC 1216 (Pat)

‘The first defendant in the first of two claims entered into a licence with the claimant in respect of a portfolio of patents, including a US patent, concerning tocilizumab, an immunosuppressive drug. The claimant sought, inter alia, a declaration that it was not obliged to continue to pay royalties under the licence in respect of its tocilizumab products. The defendants alleged that, although framed as a claim for a declaration relating to a contract, a part of the proceedings, in substance, concerned not only the scope but also the validity of the US patent. Accordingly, consideration of the claim would infringe the territorial limits of the courts jurisdictional powers and constitute an affront to comity (“the Moçambique rule”) and/or the foreign act of state doctrine, which militated against the English court determining issues relating to sovereign acts of a foreign state.’

WLR Daily, 26th May 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Huawei legal challenge against validity of Unwired Planet patent dismissed by London court – OUT-LAW.com

Posted April 26th, 2017 in news, patents, telecommunications by sally

‘Chinese mobile device manufacturer Huawei has lost a legal challenge against the validity of a patent owned by Unwired Planet.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 25th April 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Nokia and Apple patent dispute comes before High Court in London – OUT-LAW.com

‘Finnish mobile device manufacturer Nokia was due to argue that Apple has infringed one of its technology patents before the High Court in London on Friday.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 7th April 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Brexit, Article 50 and what it means for innovative businesses – Technology Law Update

Posted March 29th, 2017 in data protection, EC law, news, patents, referendums, treaties by sally

‘The shock of last June’s referendum result, with the UK electorate opting to leave the European Union, is starting to fade. Now the hard graft begins. Tomorrow British Prime Minister Theresa May will trigger Article 50, starting the two year process of negotiations that will end with a deal, an untidy departure or (maybe) an agreement to keep talking. Since the first analysis of what Brexit will mean for businesses we have learned more about what the UK intends to keep and discard. How are things looking now?’

Full story

Technology Law Update, 28th March 2017

Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk

UK businesses see record number of European patents granted by EPO – OUT-LAW.com

Posted March 9th, 2017 in EC law, intellectual property, news, patents, reports, statistics by sally

‘A record number of European patents were granted to UK businesses in 2016 by the European Patent Office (EPO), according to new figures.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 9th March 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Case Note: Jushi Group Co Ltd v OCV Intellectual Capital LLC – NIPC Law

Posted February 20th, 2017 in intellectual property, news, patents by sally

‘This was a claim by the Jushi Group Co. Ltd. (“Jushi”) for declarations of invalidity and non-infringement and the revocation of European patent number 1 831 118 for glass yarns for reinforcing organic and/or inorganic materials. The patentee, OCV Intellectual Capital LLC (a subsidiary of Owens Corning) (“OCV”), counterclaimed for infringement of the patent. Jushi admitted infringement if the patent was valid. The only issue to be determined was whether the patent was valid. The action came on before His Honour Judge Hacon on the 5 and 6 Dec 2016. His Honour delivered judgment on 6 Feb 2017.’

Full story

NIPC Law, 8th February 2017

Source: www.nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk

IP Enterprise Court still attractive despite alternatives – presiding judge – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted February 6th, 2017 in courts, intellectual property, judges, news, patents, pilot schemes, trials by sally

‘The presiding judge at the UK’s Intellectual Property Enterprise Court has said the court still serves a purpose despite the growing availability of flexible trials elsewhere.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 3rd February 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Applications to appeal patent rulings should no longer be given easy passage – Litigation Futures

Posted December 21st, 2016 in appeals, civil procedure rules, courts, news, patents by tracey

‘The principle outlined in the White Book that the Court of Appeal should more readily grant permission to appeal in patent cases no longer holds good, it ruled last week.’

Full story

litigation Futures, 20th December 2016

Source: www.litgationfutures.com

Same cost recovery principles apply to patent cases as other types of litigation, says High Court – OUT-LAW.com

Posted November 4th, 2016 in costs, news, patents by tracey

‘The principles that govern when losers of patent disputes can recover costs from winners on particular issues in the case are the same as those that apply to other types of litigation, a High Court judge has said.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 2nd November 2016

Source: wwww.out-law.com

The dark art of copyright: trademark battles from Specsavers to Facebook – The Guardian

Posted August 22nd, 2016 in copyright, intellectual property, news, patents, trade marks by sally

‘Swimmer Ryan Lochte probably isn’t bothering anyone by trademarking ‘Jeah’, his bizarre victory scream – but can Specsavers really patent ‘should’ve’, or can Facebook own ‘face’ and ‘book’? The world of trademark law is murky indeed.’

Full story

The Guardian, 20th August 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

A (brief) update on how the UK will deal with IP rights after Brexit – Technology Law Update

Posted August 8th, 2016 in copyright, EC law, enforcement, news, patents, referendums, trade marks by sally

‘The UK’s Intellectual Property Office has issued a briefing on the future for IP rights after Brexit. This gives IP owners some crumbs of comfort to innovative businesses, but little detail.’

Full story

Technology Law Update, 5th August 2016

Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) – WLR Daily

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) [2016] EWHC 1609 (Ch)

‘Where a party intervenes in an appeal from a decision of a hearing officer acting on behalf of the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, ordinary a costs order will not be made in the intervener’s favour. The court will only consider departing from its ordinary position if it is satisfied that (1) the intervener’s position was successful, (2) its submission added value to the hearing, and (3) it had not duplicated the respondent’s submissions (paras 10, 12).’

WLR Daily, 7th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk