Skip Navigation

Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases 2006 123(20):665-697; doi:10.1093/rpc/2006rpc28
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Crown Copyright

[2006] R.P.C. 28

ANGIOTECH PHARMACEUTICALS INC'S PATENT (APPLICATION FOR REVOCATION BY CONOR MEDSYSTEMS INC)

Patents Court

(Pumfrey J.): October 4–10 and December 12–14, 2005 and February 24, 20061

[2006] EWHC 260 (Pat); [2006] R.P.C. 28

Patent—Paclitaxel-eluting stents—Inventive step—Common general knowledge attributable to addressee of patent—Whether paclitaxel an obvious candidate for testing—Whether expectation of success relevant—Need to assess contribution to the art made by the specification—Commercial success—Secondary evidence no more than an aid to assessing primary evidence as to obviousness of the difference between the inventive concept and the state of the art—Patent invalid in view of cited prior art.

Key Words: Inventive step • Patents • Pharmaceuticals • Revocation

1 Paragraph numbers in this judgment are as assigned by the court.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.