By judgment of 15 August 2023 in PI proceedings brought by Bristol-Myers Squibb, the Court of Appeal of The Hague prohibited Sandoz, Stada and Teva from marketing generic apixaban.

The Unified Patent Court has the potential to change a lot about how inventions are protected in European patent practice. The UPC brings both certainty and uncertainty and has advantages, but certainly also disadvantages.

In ‘State of the Art’, our lawyers from the IP & Technology practice group share their expertise on the main themes and current developments within information law.

By decision of 11 January 2023, the District Court of The Hague (the Court) rejected Nokia’s claim for a preliminary injunction against Oleading B.V. and Reflection Investment B.V. (Oppo Distributors) regarding the alleged infringement of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs).

On 7 September 2022, the District Court of The Hague (“the Court”) rendered judgment in two final relief proceedings between Orope Germany GmbH (“Orope Germany”) and Nokia Solutions and Networks OY (“Nokia”) regarding the alleged invalidity of two of Nokia’s SEPs.

The Court of Appeal of The Hague affirms the first instance decision in which the PI judge of the District Court rejected Novartis’ claim for a preliminary injunction against Mylan.

In its interim relief decision of 21 June 2022 the PI Judge of the District Court of The Hague held Novartis’ EP 2 959 894 (“EP 894”) re fingolimod 0.5 mg provisionally invalid. This is the first substantive PI decision on this matter in Europa, where several proceedings between Novartis and Mylan are pending.

In its decision of 10 May 2022 in PI proceedings between Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company (“BMS”) and Sandoz B.V. (“Sandoz”), the PI judge of the District Court of The Hague denied BMS’ claim for injunctive relief regarding the sale of generic apixaban by Sandoz. According to the Judge, there is no inventive step due to lack of plausibility and therefore a good chance that the patent (and the SPC) will be held invalid in final relief proceedings.

Huisman had issued a press announcement that it had concluded an agreement with BMW for the design and construction of a so-called “ringer crane”. Following Huisman’s press statement, Mammoet issued a press release entitled “Mammoet starts investigation of patent infringement by Huisman and BMS”, in which it refers to the ringer crane to be built by Huisman. Huisman sued Mammoet, arguing that the suggestion that Huisman was committing patent infringement was unlawful. The Provisions Judge of the District Court in…

The District Court of The Hague (Provisions Judge) has rejected Novartis’ application, based on a patent application, for a preliminary injunction (PI), meaning Mylan can market its generic drug containing fingolimod in the Netherlands at least prior to the grant of the patent. The EPO’s Technical Board of Appeal had recently cleared the way for the granting of the patent-in-suit.

In its interim decision of 22 March 2022 the PI judge of the District Court of The Hague ruled in the PI proceedings in Novartis v Mylan that the market entry by Mylan with its generic fingolimod 0.5mg product prior to Novartis’ patent entering into force, is not unlawful. Given the very short time between summons and hearing, the PI judge further held that the case should be stayed until 17 May for further assessment of the invalidity defences, allowing…

Recently, two interesting judgments were published in separate SEP/FRAND proceedings. The first decision pertains to a confidentiality regime and the second to an ex parte AASI.