
Right: some patients prefer to receive their dosages as infrequently as possible
Today's Dutch decision has employed the rationale used by Mr Justice Kitchin in his 31 July 2007 decision (see IPKat post here) concerning the UK part of the same European patent and divisionals to its ultimate consequence. Indeed, the Dutch decision actually refers to Kitchin J’s decision.
The IPKat, who thanks Mark and Richard for sending him this news item, suspects that further discussion of the deployment of the declaration as a tool in patent litigation may just be around the corner.
One reason why alendronate is big business here
Alendronate dosage patent: the Hague District Court rules
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Rating:

No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html