Innovate: October 2012
Welcome to the Autumn 2012 edition of Innovate. We hope that you will find it an interesting and enjoyable read. If you have any questions or comments on the topics discussed, or patent matters in general, please get in touch.
In this edition of Innovate topics discussed are as follows:
Patent extensions: ambiguity on the application of the SPC Regulation
Despite numerous referrals to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the last few years, there is still ongoing uncertainty as to the interpretation of the SPC Regulation. This article looks at SPCs for second medical uses and whether a product must be "protected by a basic patent in force".
Entitlement to Damages – in the balance
Defendants establish a defence to a damages claim that otherwise would have followed from the finding that the patent was valid and infringed.
Mr Justice Arnold provides clarification and guidance on whether the inventiveness or sufficiency of a patent can be affected by evidence which is not available at the date of the patent but only comes into existence at a later date.
The High Court decides that it is not entitled to review administrative decisions of the EPO declining to give declaratory relief.
The Patents County Court reviews whether amendments made to a granted patent make the patent invalid for added matter.
The Court of Justice of the European Union has found that the rules regarding exclusive jurisdiction under the EU Jurisdiction Regulation do not prohibit courts of a member state granting cross-border interim injunctions in patent proceedings.
The Patents County Court uses case management and common-sense to decide a patent case between two well-funded multinationals in an expeditious and cost-effective manner.
Latest on Unitary Patents Court.