NIPC Law

Autho r Brenton Licence CC BY-SA 4.0 Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Cour t (HH Judge Hacon) S andoz AG and others v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2024] EWHC 796 (Pat) (12 April 2024 ) These were conjoined actions by several generic pharmaceutical manufacturers against Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH ("Bayer") for the revocation of European patent (UK) 1 845 961 ("the Patent") for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders with rivaroxaban . There were also counterclaims by Bayer for injunctions to restrain the threatened infringement of the Patent. Those threats were conceded for the purposes of the trial. Consequently, the validity of the Patent was the only issue to be tried. His Honour Judge Hacon tried those actions on 9, 12, 13,14, 15 and 16 Jan and 21 and 22 Feb 2024. By para [272] of his judgment in Sandoz AG and others v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2024] EWHC 796 (Pat) handed down on 12 April 2024, the learned judge found t...

  Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor)  Astellas Pharma Industries Ltd v Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and other s [2023] EWHC 2571 (Pat) (17 Oct 2023) This was an action for patent infringement and a counterclaim for revocation. The patent in suit was European patent (UK) 2,345,410 entitled Pharmaceutical Composition for Modified Release  and concerned a modified release pharmaceutical composition containing mirabegron (or a salt thereof) as an active ingredient.   Astellas Pharma Industries Ltd, (Astellas) alleged that generic mirabegron tablets that Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and Teva UK Ltd ("Teva") and Sandoz AG and Sandoz Ltd  (Sandoz) proposed to launch would infringe the patent.   Teva and Sandoz each counterclaimed for revocation of the patent on the grounds of obviousness, insufficiency and added matter.   Astellas responded to the counterclaim by applying for the amendment of the patent....

  Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lord Justices Arnold, Nugee and Warby) Sandoz Ltd v Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company [2023] EWCA Civ 472 (4 May 2023) This was an appeal by Bristol Myers Squibb Ireland ("BMS") against Mr Justice Meade's judgment in    Sandoz Ltd and another v Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland (Unlimited) Company [2022] EWHC 822 (Pat) (7 April 2022) which I discussed in  Patents - Sandoz Ltd v Bristol-Myers Squibb   on 28 Aug 2022.  In that judgment, his lordship held that  European patent (UK) 1 427 415 B1 (“the patent”)  was invalid for lack of plausibility and technical contribution.  Permission to appeal against Mr Justice Meade's judgment was granted by Lord Justice Lewison. The appeal was heard by Lord Justices Arnold, Nugee and Warby on 19 and 20 April 2022. They handed down judgment on 4 May 202. Their lordships unanimously dismissed the appeal (see Sandoz Ltd v Bristol-Myers Sq...

  Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Meade)  Sandoz Ltd and another v Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland (Unlimited) Company  [2022] EWHC 822 (Pat) (7 April 2022) These were two separate actions for the revocation of a  European patent (UK)   1 427 415 B1 (“the patent”) .  The patent was held by Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland (Unlimited) Company ("BMS") and the proceedings were brought by  Sandoz Limited (“Sandoz”) and   Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited (“Teva”). BMS  counterclaimed against both claimants for infringement which was admitted subject to the validity of the patent. The actions came on for trial before Mr Justice Mrade between 31 Jan and 10 Feb 2022.  By para [257] of his judgment of 7 April 2022 he held that the patent was invalid for lack of plausibility and technical contribution ( see Sandoz Ltd v Bristol-Myers Squib Holdings Ireland (Unlimited) Company [2022] EWHC 822 (Pat) (7 April 2022...