Click the case name for better results:

Actavis UK Ltd and Others v Eli Lilly and Company: CA 25 Jun 2015

Lilly appealed against a finding that an Actavis drug had not infringed its patents to the limited extent of holding that there would be indirect infringement in four jurisdictions, but they agreed with the Judge that there would be no direct infringement. The appeal raised the issue of the correct approach under UK law (and … Continue reading Actavis UK Ltd and Others v Eli Lilly and Company: CA 25 Jun 2015

Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents: PatC 18 Mar 2008

The company appealed against rejection of its patent application, the objection being as to the invention’s patentability. The EPO had granted a European Patent. Judges: Patten J Citations: [2008] EWHC 518 (Pat), GB 0325145.1 Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents Act 1977 Citing: Cited – Astron Clinica Ltd and others v The Comptroller General of Patents, Designs … Continue reading Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents: PatC 18 Mar 2008

Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents Trade Marks and Designs: CA 21 Sep 2021

AI created Invention is not Patentable The case appears to be about artificial intelligence and whether AI-based machines can make patentable inventions – correct processing of application Held: The appeal failed. On the face of the Form 7s he filed, Dr Thaler did not comply with either of the requirements laid down by section 13(2), … Continue reading Thaler v Comptroller General of Patents Trade Marks and Designs: CA 21 Sep 2021

Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents: CA 8 Oct 2008

No Pattern Established to Patent Computer Systems The Comptroller appealed against the decision in Chancery to grant a patent to the clamant for an invention which the comptroller said should have been excluded from protection under section 1(2) as a computer program. It was argued that the UK was taking a different approach to the … Continue reading Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents: CA 8 Oct 2008

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Lisa Draxlmaier Gmbh v Bos Gmbh and Co Kg: PatC 8 Nov 2022

Patent action in which the claimant seeks a declaration of non-infringement (‘DNI’) against the patentee, the defendant (BOS) under section 71 of the Patents Act 1977. The subject matter of the EU patent (EP 3266631 B1) is part of a system of blinds installed in car windows. Judges: Sir Anthony Mann Citations: [2022] EWHC 2823 … Continue reading Lisa Draxlmaier Gmbh v Bos Gmbh and Co Kg: PatC 8 Nov 2022

Stena Rederi Aktiebolag and Another v Irish Ferries Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2003

A ferry plied its way between Dublin and Holyhead, coming into English territorial waters three or four times a day, and for up to three hours on each occasion. The claimants asserted that the construction of the hull infringed its patent. Held: The Act specifically excluded liability where an infringing ship or other item came … Continue reading Stena Rederi Aktiebolag and Another v Irish Ferries Ltd: CA 6 Feb 2003

Linstol UK Limited v Huang (Patent): IPO 21 Nov 2012

In an earlier interim decision relating to an application for revocation, the claims of the patent had been found to be invalid but the patentee was allowed the opportunity to file amendments under s.75 aimed at rectifying the defects found. A request to amend was subsequently filed which was opposed by the claimant for revocation. … Continue reading Linstol UK Limited v Huang (Patent): IPO 21 Nov 2012

Hambleton of Sterling IP and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (Patent): IPO 6 Aug 2012

Berni Hambleton of Sterling IP initiated proceedings under section 72(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1977 for revocation of the patent on the grounds that the invention as defined in claims 1, 21 to 25 and 34 was not entitled to its earliest priority date, and that the invention as such lacked an inventive step over … Continue reading Hambleton of Sterling IP and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (Patent): IPO 6 Aug 2012

Ina Research Inc (Patent): IPO 28 Jun 2011

IPO The application relates to an arrhythmia model animal that enables an evaluation of the QT interval prolongation by a drug. The QT interval is the time period which elapses between the Q wave and the T wave in the electrical cycle of the heart. Some drugs can prolonging the electrocardiogram QT interval and induce … Continue reading Ina Research Inc (Patent): IPO 28 Jun 2011

Norman Paterson and Nicholas Jones (Patent): IPO 30 Sep 2008

IPO The application related to a device for generating electricity by pumping water to an impeller attached to a generator. The hearing officer upheld the examiner’s objection that the invention operated in a manner contrary to well-established physical laws and was therefore neither capable of industrial application nor sufficiently disclosed. Citations: [2008] UKIntelP o26608 Links: … Continue reading Norman Paterson and Nicholas Jones (Patent): IPO 30 Sep 2008

IGT (Patent) O/120/07: IPO 9 May 2007

IPO In a computer networked system for monitoring gaming machines and tables in a casino, information on player activity is sent to casino employees on portable handheld computers linked to the system allowing them to monitor play, identify the location of players and make awards of free games, goods or services. The contribution was assessed, … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/120/07: IPO 9 May 2007

Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc (Patent): IPO 24 May 2007

The hearing officer had deferred a decision on whether to order the claimant to give security for costs in revocation proceedings (see O/345/06) in order to allow either party to request a written opinion. The claimant so requested and the proceedings were stayed to await the opinion. This found that all claims lacked novelty over … Continue reading Ian Popeck v Runaway Technology, Inc (Patent): IPO 24 May 2007

DNA Electronics Ltd, Christofer Toumazou, Bhusana Premanode and Leila Shepherd (Patent): IPO 14 May 2007

As a result of an uncontested application filed under Section 13(1) by DNA Electronics Ltd, it was found that Leila Shepherd should be mentioned as a joint inventor in any patent granted for the invention and directed that an addendum slip be prepared mentioning her as a joint inventor for the published patent application for … Continue reading DNA Electronics Ltd, Christofer Toumazou, Bhusana Premanode and Leila Shepherd (Patent): IPO 14 May 2007

IGT (Patent) O/097/07: IPO 5 Apr 2007

IPO This application relates to an electronic gaming machine such as a ‘slot machine’ wherein players begin the game by pulling an arm or pushing a button which in turn rotates a series of reels or an equivalent video representation thereof, if when the reels stop, a winning arrangement of symbols is displayed, the player … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/097/07: IPO 5 Apr 2007

IGT (Patent) O/077/07: IPO 15 Mar 2007

IPO Excluded fields (refused) – In a gaming machine, different results were classified into sets producing the same outcome, all results producing the same outcome being in the same set; the results were numbered and stored in a memory with the outcomes; and a processor randomly selected one of the outcomes and one of the … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/077/07: IPO 15 Mar 2007

IGT (Patent) O/054/07: IPO 22 Feb 2007

IPO Added subject matter, Excluded fields (refused) – The invention related to a trajectory-based game of chance for implementation on a video gaming machine. The claim related to a gaming machine but in the light of Aerotel/Macrossan [2006] EWCA Civ 1371 it was agreed that the contribution was a data structure including a probability distribution … Continue reading IGT (Patent) O/054/07: IPO 22 Feb 2007

CFPH LLC (Patent): IPO 14 Dec 2004

IPO The two applications are concerned with networked interactive wagering on the outcomes of events, with particular emphasis on reducing processing delays to a minimum so that in circumstances where prices are changing continuously, a client is provided with the most up-to-date information before placing a bet. In refusing the application, the hearing officer found … Continue reading CFPH LLC (Patent): IPO 14 Dec 2004

Chan v Jeffcoat (Patent): IPO 20 Jun 2001

IPO The patent concerned a non-woven fabric used primarily for wound dressing. The parties had discussed such a wound dressing in 1993, and in 1994 a company was formed to carry on the business of development and production of wound dressings, with the parties as shareholders. The defendant was managing director and had approached a … Continue reading Chan v Jeffcoat (Patent): IPO 20 Jun 2001

In re IGT / Acres Gaming Inc: PatC 19 Mar 2008

The court was asked: ‘When a claim defines an invention partly by reference to excluded subject-matter e.g. a business method, how do you search the prior art?’ The company appealed against rejection of its request for a patent. Judges: Peter Prescott QC Citations: [2008] EWHC 568 (Pat), GB 0311200 Links: Bailii Statutes: Patents Act 1977 … Continue reading In re IGT / Acres Gaming Inc: PatC 19 Mar 2008

Brooker and Another v Fisher: CA 4 Apr 2008

The claimant had asserted a joint authorship of the song ‘A Whiter Shade of Pale’ written in the sixties. The defendant appealed saying that the claim had been brought too late, and that the finding ignored practice in the music industry. The copyright in the song had already been assigned by the authors before the … Continue reading Brooker and Another v Fisher: CA 4 Apr 2008

Dyson Appliances Limited v Hoover Limited: CA 4 Oct 2001

Hoover appealed a finding that Dyson’s patent was valid and infringed. They asserted the patent was not novel in the light of a US patent, and even so was obvious. One test was whether an application of the claimed patent would inevitably infringe the previous patent. Both parties had prepared models from the earlier patent. … Continue reading Dyson Appliances Limited v Hoover Limited: CA 4 Oct 2001

Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc and Another v H N Norton and Co Ltd; Same v Penn Etc: HL 26 Oct 1995

A patent for a substance which had been produced naturally before the application of the process was invalid. The patent was invalidated after the discovery that the effect was produced naturally from an acid metabolite. Patent infringement does not require that one should be aware that one is infringing: ‘whether or not a person is … Continue reading Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc and Another v H N Norton and Co Ltd; Same v Penn Etc: HL 26 Oct 1995

Schutz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd and Another: PatC 31 Mar 2010

The claimant said that the defendant had infringed its patents regarding containers for the transport of liquids in bulk. The patent provided for a steel cage surrounding a large bottle. The defendant supplied refurbished or replacement bottles. The patent was attacked for obviousness. Held: The claim failed. The court held, inter alia, as to whether … Continue reading Schutz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK Ltd and Another: PatC 31 Mar 2010

Recipero Ltd (Patent): IPO 23 Dec 2014

IPO Excluded fields (refused) – The invention relates to a system for generating electronic security documents on a computing system. The invention provides a new method for generating and storing a security document in a multi-node network in which the document is assigned a unique document identifier including amongst other things a process identifier, and … Continue reading Recipero Ltd (Patent): IPO 23 Dec 2014

Brugger v Medic-Aid Ltd (No 2): ChD 1996

B alleged infringement by M of its patented nebulizer. M replied saying that the claims failed for obviousness. Features of the nebulizer were admittedly old and well known, but the claimant asserted a new mechanism which reduced the size of the droplets, increasing its efficiency. Held: The patent was invalid for obviousness. Laddie J set … Continue reading Brugger v Medic-Aid Ltd (No 2): ChD 1996

Mclaughlin and Harvey Limited v Openhydro Group Limited: IPO 11 Feb 2014

IPO The patent related to a deployment method for a turbine base which is deployed on the seabed. The claimant and the defendant worked together on a project in this area, and the dispute was whose employees had devised the invention. The dispute hinged around what had occurred between the production by the claimant of … Continue reading Mclaughlin and Harvey Limited v Openhydro Group Limited: IPO 11 Feb 2014

Kirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc: HL 21 Oct 2004

The claims arose in connection with the validity and alleged infringement of a European Patent on erythropoietin (‘EPO’). Held: ‘Construction is objective in the sense that it is concerned with what a reasonable person to whom the utterance was addressed would have understood the author to be using the words to mean. Notice, however, that … Continue reading Kirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc: HL 21 Oct 2004

Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1: CA 27 Oct 2006

In each case it was said that the requested patent concerned an invention consisting of a computer program, and was not therefore an invention and was unpatentable. In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the appeal was against refusal. Held: Jacob LJ said: ‘the court must approach … Continue reading Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1: CA 27 Oct 2006

Fisher v Brooker and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

The claimant sought a share in the royalties from the song ‘A whiter shade of pale’ but had delayed his claim for 38 years. He had contributed the organ solo which had contributed significantly to the song’s success. He now sought a share of future royalties. Held: His appeal was allowed. Limitation did not apply, … Continue reading Fisher v Brooker and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011

The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. The claimant asserted that their claim was an intellectual property claim, allowing section 72 … Continue reading Gray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same: ChD 25 Feb 2011