Fun with Fujifilm Declarations! An AIPPI Rapid Response Event

Mark your calendars!
Whether you have been following the Fujifilm v AbbVie case every step of the way or you are coming to it afresh, do not fear!  Next week's Rapid Response event organized by AIPPI UK will be everything you need to understand how this decision will effect you, your clients and future litigation strategies.  Here come the details:
Date:  Thursday, 6 April 2017 
Time:  5:30PM for 6PM 
Place:  Allen & Overy, Bishops Square, London E1 6AD  
Who: Michael Silverleaf QC, Mike Brealey QC, Ravi Srinivasan  
What:  Mr Justice Henry Carr’s judgment of 3 March 2017 was the first time that relief has been ordered by the English Courts in the form of an Arrow declaration. In this special event, a panel of distinguished speakers will review the decision from the perspective of patent law, competition law and patent prosecution strategy to assess whether the circumstances of the case were sufficiently unusual to make this a one-off decision or whether this marks the beginning of a new trend in biosimilars patent litigation where patent thickets are dense and the need for commercial certainty high. AbbVie was alleged to be avoiding adjudication on the validity of its patents. Was the declaration justified or was AbbVie merely operating within the rules?
The AmeriKat encourages speedy registration as this is promising to be a blockbuster event, including some helpful suggestions on how best to benefit from this revamped litigation tool. For those who can't attend, there will be an IPKat report on the evening's proceedings soon after.   In the meantime, you can get yourself up to date with these handy Kat summary here and here.
Fun with Fujifilm Declarations! An AIPPI Rapid Response Event Fun with Fujifilm Declarations!  An AIPPI Rapid Response Event Reviewed by Annsley Merelle Ward on Friday, March 31, 2017 Rating: 5

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:

Powered by Blogger.