Originally posted on IPKat.
The recent Board of Appeal decision in T 1977/22 related to the patentability of claims defining subject matter with open-ended parameter ranges. The question before the Board of Appeal was whether a claimed open range, and its numerically infinite scope, could ever be said to be sufficiently disclosed (Article 83 EPC). The Board of…
Originally posted on IPKat.
Earlier this week the CJEU provided its ruling in the highly anticipated case of BSH Hausgeräte v. Electrolux (Case C-339/22, February 2025). The case addressed longstanding questions about the jurisdiction of European courts when patent invalidity is raised as a defence in an infringement case. The CJEU found that national courts maintain jurisdiction over infringement…
Originally posted on IPKat.
In Plant-e v Bioo the UPC provided its first decision addressing the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement proceedings (UPC_CFI_239/2023). The Local Division of the Hague set out a novel four-part test for assessing equivalence drawn from various national jurisdictions. The test appears relatively patentee-friendly, with the Local Division finding infringement of the claims despite…
Originally posted on IPKat.
The Board of Appeal decision in T 2543/22 relates to a manufacturing method for preparing a therapeutic peptide. The Board of Appeal found that whilst various methods were known, the skilled person would not have had a reasonable expectation of success in applying them to produce the specific claimed peptide. The case highlights some…
This post is based on a previous article on IPKat.
The Paris Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) first substantive decision on patent validity in DexCom v Abbott (UPC_CFI_230/2023), provides some interesting commentary on how much the description should be taken into account when interpreting the claims. Claim interpretation is the subject of the highly…
This post is based on a previous article on IPKat.
The Board of Appeal decision in T 0295/22 tackles the question of whether a new mode of administration of a drug should be considered a new medical use. The Board of Appeal concludes that the current EPO Guidelines for Examination are wrong on this point, and that…
This post is based on a previous article on IPKat.
The intersection of AI and pharmaceutical development presents unprecedented opportunities but also raises complex legal questions. Recent developments and successes in AI-drug discovery highlight some of the key IP issues in AI-drug development. Companies are being forced to tackle these issues head-on as the IP…
This post is based on a previous article on IPKat.
The Board of Appeal decision in T 2130/22 considered the inventive step of a pharmaceutical formulation in which the technical effect relied upon for inventive step was also a functional feature of the claim. The decision confirms that when a technical effect is specified as a functional feature…
The Board of Appeal decision in T 0816/22 considered whether post-published phase III clinical trial data showing lack of efficacy can invalidate a second medical use patent that appeared plausible based on the data in the application as filed.
The recent Board of Appeal decision T 0326/22 is yet further confirmation, if any were needed, that functionally-defined antibody claims remain viable at the EPO.
