Skip Navigation

Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases 2007 124(22-23):729-795; doi:10.1093/rpc/2007rpc32
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
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Crown Copyright

[2007] R.P.C. 32

GENERICS (UK) LTD v H. LUNDBECK A/S

Patents Court

(Kitchin J.): March 6–9, 12–16, 20 and May 4, 20071

[2007] EWHC 1040 (Pat); [2007] R.P.C. 32

Patent—Applications for revocation—Claims to pure (+) enantiomer, pharmaceutical compositions containing it and process of obtaining it—Prior art racemate—Novelty—Construction—Whether claim excluded (+) enantiomer in prior art racemic mixture—Inventive step—Hindsight—Evidence of what the patentee actually did—Commercial success—Unexpected technical benefit—Insufficiency—Whether claims extended beyond inventive contribution of the patent.

Key Words: Common general knowledge • European patents • Hindsight • Inventive step • Novelty • Pharmaceuticals • Prior art • Revocation • Sufficiency • Validity

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


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.