The claimant sought the revocation of the defendant’s European patent in respect of a nucleotide and amino acid sequence of a novel member of the TNF ligand superfamily which it called Neutrokine-a.
Held: The patent was invalid for lack of industrial applicability, insufficiency and obviousness. In particular, in the light of the common general knowledge, the notional addressee of the Patent would have concluded that the ‘functions’ of Neutrokine-a ‘were, at best, a matter of expectation and then at far too high a level of generality to constitute a sound or concrete basis for anything except a research project’.
Judges:
Kitchin J
Citations:
[2008] RPC 29, (2008) 31(10) IPD 31066, (2009) 105 BMLR 27, [2008] EWHC 1903 (Pat)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Eli Lilly and Company v Human Genome Sciences, Inc PatC 17-Oct-2008
The parties discussed the costs order to be made after a challenge to a patent succeeded on some grounds but not on others. . .
See Also – Eli Lilly and Co v Human Genome Sciences CA 23-Feb-2009
The court considered directions for a forthcoming appeal, and in particular as to its date, where there were parallel revocation proceedings before the European Court. . .
Appeal from – Eli Lilly and Co v Human Genome Sciences Inc CA 9-Feb-2010
The appellant had had granted to it a patent for a new human protein, Neutrokine-a. It now appealed against revocation of the patent on the basis that as yet there was no possible industrial application within the Convention so as to allow . .
At first instance – Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company SC 2-Nov-2011
The court considered an appeal against the declaration of invalidity of a biomedical patent for a new human protein on the grounds that it was not susceptible of industrial application.
Held: The patentee’s appeal succeeded. The court had to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.271307