Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / Jeremy Phillips / patents / validity / Breaking news: Angiotech appeal allowed

Breaking news: Angiotech appeal allowed

- , ,
Do Kats have moles? This one does, and his mole has just reported from the House of Lords that the United Kingdom's highest appeal court has just allowed the appeal in Conor MedSystems v Angiotech Pharmaceuticals and that the patent in dispute has been found valid.

Right: in order to penetrate the House of Lords without detection, the IPKat's mole was forced to disguise himself as a Law Lord (nb. you can buy this mole here).

Further details will be posted when they're available. Meanwhile, for the story so far click here for the original decision of the late Mr Justice Pumfrey and here for the now reversed decision of the Court of Appeal. The IPKat's comments on these decisions may be perused here and here respectively.

FOOTNOTE: the full text of the Lords' speeches can be found here
Breaking news: Angiotech appeal allowed Breaking news: Angiotech appeal allowed Reviewed by Jeremy on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 Rating: 5

2 comments:

  1. AnonymousWednesday, 9 July 2008 at 11:50:00 GMT+1

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldjudgmt/jd080709/conor.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousTuesday, 22 July 2008 at 03:32:00 GMT+1

    I wonder why the EP patent in issue could not be invalidated on the issue of insufficiency alone. Why 'obviousness' was brought in?

    ReplyDelete

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

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.