Posts

Showing posts with the label expedition

Staying Expedited Proceedings - Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Mylan

Image
Author Karjis Sambrans   Licence  CC BY 2.0   Source Wikimedia Common s Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Ian Karet)  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd another v Generics (UK) Ltd (T/A Viatris) and another [2021] EWHC 2897 (Pat) (29 Ort 2021) This was an application by Generics (UK) Limited and Mylan UK Healthcare Limited ("Mylan") for a stay of the expedited trial that had been ordered by Mr Justice Mellor in  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd and another v Generics UK Ltd (t/a Mylan) and another [2021] EWHC 2198 (Pat) (2 Aug 2021) which I discussed in Practice - Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Mylan   on 30 March 2022.  The purpose of the proposed stay was to await the outcome of opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office under Part V of the European Patent Convention.  The outcome of those proceedings including an appeal could be expected in 2023 or  2024. The reason why Mr Justice Mellor ordered an expedited trial is that Eur...

Practice - Neurim Pharmaceuticals v Mylan

Image
Author The Judicial Office, UK Lic ence CC BYSA 4.0 Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd and another v Generics UK Ltd (t/a Mylan) and another [2021] EWHC 2198 (Pat) (2 Aug 2021) This case shows how quickly the English courts can move to resolve disputes when there is a need for them do so.  On 2 Aug 2022 Mr Justice Mellor ordered a 2-day trial of a number of preliminary issues in a claim for the infringement of European patent (UK) 3 103 443  2 months after the application for the expedited trial  and 3 months after the patent had been granted. The reason for the urgency was that the patent prevented Mylan from marketing a treatment for insomnia through the use of melatonin. As Me Justice Mellor said at para [40] of his judgment in  Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd and another v Generics UK Ltd (t/a Mylan) and another [2021] EWHC 2198 (Pat) (2 Aug 2021): "i) Neurim has a prima facie valid pa...

International Patent Litigation - Advanced Bionics v MED-El

Image
Author  Thomas Woolner   Source Wikimedia   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Advanced Bionics AG and another v MED-El Elektromedizinische Gerate GmbH [2021] EWHC 2415 (Pat) (31 Aug 2021) In International Patent Litigation - Abbott Laboratories Ltd v Dexcom Inc . 3 March 2022 I discussed the so-called German "injunction gap" and an application to expedite the trial of a revocation action in England in an attempt to beat it.   In  Abbott Laboratories Ltd v Dexcom Incorporated [2021] EWHC 2246 (Pat) (6 Aug 2021) the application for expedition was refused. In  Advanced Bionics AG and another v MED-El Elektromedizinische Gerate GmbH [2021] EWHC 2415 (Pat) (31 Aug 2021), a similar application to the same judge succeeded.   In my case note on Abbott I wrote: "In Germany, unlike the United Kingdom, it is not possible to challenge the validity of a patent in infringement proceedings. Alleged infringers who wish to challenge the valid...

International Patent Litigation - Abbott Laboratories Ltd v Dexcom Inc

Image
  Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Abbott Laboratories Ltd v Dexcom In c. [2021] EWHC 2246 (Pat) (6 Aug 2021) This was an application for an order to expedite the trial of an action that Abbott Laboratories Ltd. ("Abbott") had begun 2 days earlier against Dexcom Inc ("Dexcom") for the revocation of 4 of Dexcom Inc's European patents. The reason for the action and application is that Dexcom had brought proceedings for the infringement of those patents in Germany.  The trials of those actions were likely to take place between early March and the end of April 2022. In Germany, unlike the United Kingdom, it is not possible to challenge the validity of a patent in infringement proceedings.  Alleged infringers who wish to challenge the validity of the patent they are alleged to have infringed must bring opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office under art 99 of the European Patent Convention or start separate revocation proceedings in Germany....

International Patent Litigation - Nicoventures Trading Ltd v Philip Morris

Image
Basher Eyre / Junction of Fetter Lane and Rolls Buildings Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Birss)   Nicoventures Trading Ltd v Philip Morris Products, SA ( [2020] EWHC 1594 (Pat) (16 June 2020) This was an application by Philip Morris Products SA ("Philip Morris") to expedite the trial of an action that it had brought against British American Tobacco ("BAT") for the invalidation of European patents (UK) 3 398 460 and 3 491 944 for heated tobacco products which had been invented by John Howard Robinson and others ("the Robinson patents").  BAT resisted the application on the ground that the case for expedition had not been made out. However, there was also a contingent cross-application by BAT for expedition of the trial of an action that it had brought against Philip Morris for the invalidation of the Robinson patents and a counterclaim for the infringement of European patents (UK) 3 248 484, 3 248 486, and 3 248 483 for heated ...