When must a patent be plausible?

No items found.
09 October 2012
Tags
Litigation
Life

The Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice (vol. 7, issue 9) has published an article by partner Darren Smyth about Generics [UK] Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd & Another.

Mr Justice Arnold rules that the technical effect disclosed in the patent to support inventive step must be plausible as at the priority date, and that post-dated evidence cannot be used to challenge this plausibility.

To read the JIPLP article in full, click here.

Related articles

EIP recognised across the board in IAM Patent 1000, 2026
29 May 2026
We're pleased to be featured again in the IAM Patent 1000, 2026. The guide is one of the most trusted independent rankings of patent professionals worldwide, built on months of research and direct feedback from clients and peers.
Five EIP leaders recognised in WIPR 2026
11 May 2026
We are delighted to announce that five members of our team have been named in WIPR Leaders 2026: Jerome Spaargaren, Heather McCann, Gary Moss, Andrew Sharples, and Sebastian Fuchs.
EIP recognsied for strategic leadership in patent law at the Professional Services Management Excellence Awards
26 March 2026
EIP has been recognised with two Professional Services Management Excellence Awards 2026, including Excellence in Strategic Leadership and Best in Theme: Leadership. The awards reflect the firm’s commitment to aligning patent expertise with commercial insight, strengthening leadership across the firm and delivering patent strategy that supports investment, growth and high‑value business decisions.