NIPC Law

Omalizumab structure Authors  Manav Segal, Jeffrey R Stokes, Thomas B. Casale Licence CC BY 2,5 Source Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon)  Celltrion Inc v Genentech, Inc and another [2025] EWHC 174 (Pat) (30 Jan 2025)   This was an action by Celltrion Inc ("Celltrion") for the revocation of European patent (UK)  3 805 248 B1  for a "Process for concentration of antibodies and therapeutic products thereof" ("the patent") held by Genentech Inc ("Genentech") and Novartis AG ("Novartis") and a counterclaim by Genentech and Novartis against Celltrion and its UK subsidiary for infringement.  The action and counterclaim were tried by His Honour Judge Hacon between 24 Oct 2024 and 1 Nov 2024.  The learned judge delivered judgment on 30 Jan 2025 (see  Celltrion Inc v Genentech, Inc and another  [2025] EWHC 174 (Pat) (30 Jan 2025)).  By para [193] of his judgment, he found that the patent was valid and infringed. Th...

  Jane Lambert Court of Appeal (Lords Justices Peter Jackson, Arnold and Stuart Smith) Generics (UK) Ltd and others v AstraZeneca AB    [2025] EWCA Civ 903 (16 July 2025) This was an appeal by AstraZeneca AB from the judgment of Dr Michael Tappin KC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court in    Generics (UK) Ltd v AstraZeneca AB [2025] EWHC 1012 (Pat) (28 April 2025).  In that case, Generics (UK) Limited and several other generic pharmaceutical manufacturers had claimed a declaration that the following supplementary protection certificates were invalid and an order for their revocation: SPC/GB13/021  for dapagliflozin and pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof;   and SPC/GB14/050  for a combination of dapagliflozin or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and metformin or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.  Those SPCs derived from  European patent (UK) 1 506 211 B1 .  The claimants contended that the ...

By John Schmidt - en:Image:Sequencing.jpg, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1584721   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Birss)  Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA and others [2021] EWHC 57 (Pat) (20 Jan 2021) This was an action for patent infringement and a counterclaim for revocation.  The defendants, referred to collectively as "MGI" , wish to sell  DNA sequencing systems in the UK.  The claimant,  Illumina Cambridge Ltd ("Illumina")  contended that 4 of those systems infringed its patents. MGI denied infringement and alleged that the patents were invalid for obviousness, insufficiency and added matter, The action and counterclaim came on for trial before Mr Justice Birss on  9  to  13 , 16 to  20 , 25 , 26  Nov and 9  Dec 2020.  Judgment was delivered on 20 Jan 2021 (see Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA and others [2021] EWHC 57 (Pat) (20 Jan 2021). T...