Case Reports

Amgen Inc v Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH & Ors Order of 13 October 2023 (Order ref ORD_580110/2023) [1] Both Amgen and Sanofi-Aventis appealed an order [2] in which an extension of the deadline...

The UPC has published its third decision to preserve evidence (following the related Orders of 13 and 14 June 2023 in Oerlikon Textile GMBH & CO KG v Himson Engineering Private Limited and v Bhagat...

On the same day that the decision granting 10x Genomics a provisional injunction against NanoString on the basis of the unitary patent EP4108782 was announced (19 September 2023), there also took...

Ocado Innovation Limited v. Autostore AS Order of 11 September 2023[1] (Order ref ORD_571090/2023) Ocado filed an infringement action against Autostore on 2 June 2023 in the Milan local division.

Amgen Inc v Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH & Ors Order of 29 August 2023 (Order ref ORD_566193/2023)[1] This case arises from a difference of date of service on multiple defendants, and thus raises...

The UPC Local Division in Munich handed down a decision on 19 September 2023 following a hearing over two days on 5/6 September 2023, granting a provisional injunction against NanoString to restrain...

A judge of the Central court in Munich has recently considered a request by a third party for access to written pleadings and evidence under Rule 262.1(b) in two cases.

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. Order of 23 August 2023 Edwards Lifesciences Corporation (Claimant in the main action) is the proprietor of EP3646825,...

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH & Others v Amgen Inc - Order of 24 August 2023 Background On the opening day of UPC, 1 June 2023, Amgen sued Sanofi for infringement of EP 3,666,797 in the Munich...

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH & Others v Amgen Inc - Order of 24 August 2023 Background On the opening day of UPC, 1 June 2023, Amgen sued Sanofi for infringement of EP 3,666,797 in the Munich...

The UPC is a new legal system, and it is not to be expected that its terminology should follow any single national system. When we look at the UPC Agreement itself, and the Rules of Procedure and the...

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. Order of 1 August 2023 Edwards Lifesciences Corporation (Claimant in the main action) is the proprietor of EP3646825,...

myStromer AG v Revolt Zycling AG, Order of 22 June 2023 and Order of 30 June 2023 [1] The UPC - Düsseldorf Local Division - has issued its first ex parte provisional injunction only recently...

Oerlikon Textile GMBH & CO KG v Himson Engineering Private Limited, Order of 13 June 2023 Oerlikon Textile GMBH & CO KG v Bhagat Group, Order of 14 June 2023 Just two weeks after the Unified Patent...

The EPO has recently added ‘Requests for unitary effect' to its Statistics & Trends Centre. The Statistics & Trends Centre provides a dashboard that now gives information about requests for unitary...

In the latest decision of a long-running battle over use of the trademark “youview”, the High Court issued a decision, this week, that may require the £100 million internet television service to...

UK Intellectual Property law was enhanced last week when the Intellectual Property Act 2014 (IP Act) was given Royal Assent. It is expected that the IP Act’s provisions will start to come into force...

The UK Intellectual Property Office has refused to grant an SPC for a medical device, as noted in the decision BL O/141/14. Whilst those aware of the SPC legislation may not find this surprising, a...

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has highlighted again the importance of the form and amount of detail shown in the views (formally called “representations”) of a design...

In Cosmetic Warriors Limited & Lush Limited v Amazon.co.uk Limited & Amazon EU SARL, Mr John Baldwin QC (sitting as deputy judge) found that the aforesaid Amazon companies (collectively referred to...

In Hearst Holdings Inc & Anor v A.V.E.L.A. Inc & Ors [2014] EWHC 439 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss held that A.V.E.L.A. Inc. and its co-defendants (together “AVELA”) have infringed Hearst Holdings Inc.

Roger Wyand QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) recently handed down judgment in Comic Enterprises Limited v Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation [2014] EWHC 185 (Ch).

Case law on the European Patent Office’s approach to non-technical inventions is quite a minefield. This is particularly so in relation to inventions that involve a presentation of information.

Resolution Chemicals Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 29 July 2013Lundbeck’s patent for the pharmaceutical enantiomer escitalopram has been extensively litigated worldwide.

Two sets of changes to the framework for proceedings between parties in intellectual property (IP) disputes in the UK were both introduced on 1 October 2013.

Football Association Premier League Ltd v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and others [2013] EWHC 2058 (Ch)SummaryBy way of a hearing on 16 August 2013, the Football Association Premier League (“FAPL”),...

In HTC Corporation v Gemalto SA and HTC Corporation v Gemalto NV[2013] EWHC 1876 (Pat), Mr Justice Birss ruled upon the validity and infringement of two telecommunications patents concerning...

Boxing Brands Limited and (1) Sports Direct International PLC, (2) Queensberry Boxing IP Limited, (3) Sportsdirect.com Retail Limited and (4) Lillywhites Limited – 8 to 12 July 2013 – Mr Justice...

SummaryIn this High Court case ([2013] EWHC 2310 (Ch)), Birss J held that the UK high-street fashion chain Topshop committed an act of passing off when they sold T-shirts emblazoned with a photograph...

Viewers of the TV show “Dragons’ Den” might remember the now highly successful Trunki children’s ride-on suitcase which was unanimously rejected by the Dragons as a bad idea.