When a party appealed a patent judge’s conclusions as to obviousness of a patent under challenge, that party should put before the court a summary showing succinctly what principles of law the judge had infringed.
Judges:
Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Laws The Vice-Chancellor
Citations:
[2003] EWCA Civ 1545, Times 16-Dec-2003
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – David J Instance Ltd and Another v Denny Brothers Printing Ltd CA 20-Jun-2001
In a case where a patent was being challenged for obviousness, the judge was not necessarily obliged to follow the structured approach recommended in the Windsurfing International case. Here the judge had gone straight to the issue at the heart of . .
Appeal from – Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd Arrow Generics Ltd, Generics (UK) Ltd v Istituto Gentili Spa, Merck and Co Inc PatC 22-Jan-2003
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Angiotech Pharmaceuticals and Another v Conor Medsystems Inc CA 16-Jan-2007
The appellants challenged a finding that their patent for a vascular stent failed for obviousness.
Held: To overcome a judge’s finding in such a case some error of principle had to be shown. No such error was shown and the appeal failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.187541