tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post4417013775112762367..comments2024-03-29T06:53:23.405+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Double Jeopardy for H Lundbeck - Escitalopram SPC back in Court and no speedy ResolutionVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-33554632826653727092013-04-20T11:09:31.942+01:002013-04-20T11:09:31.942+01:00That's not fair on the Indians. They have rule...That's not fair on the Indians. They have rules on what or is not new. Even if not know before, something may still be known to the Indians. A little difficult to get one's head around such a position. Just how can a country that can only copy consider something unknown to them to be new? Do Indian photocopiers take a blank piece of paper and create a work of Shakespeare, for example, I wonder?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-60697728658603134122013-04-19T19:07:58.148+01:002013-04-19T19:07:58.148+01:00If something is new, the question of whether it...If something is new, the question of whether it's obvious is one of fact - on which evidence will be required. We don't have <i> a priori </i> rules about what is or isn't obvious - unlike the Indians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-26480197728913976032013-04-18T20:31:42.465+01:002013-04-18T20:31:42.465+01:00Anon needs to remember the point made in the blog....Anon needs to remember the point made in the blog. This is a test of what was patentable many moons ago. It is not a test of whether enantiomers are patentable today.<br /><br />I'm note sure who was going around telling people the House of Lords decision established a general rule that enantiomers were patentable. This would certainly have been incorrect. Irrespective of this decision, enantiomers were patentable and are still patentable. It all depends on the facts of the case. The same facts that would have supported patentability in the 80s are less likely to support patentability today. Science moves on and patent law is always playing catch up.<br /><br />The HoL decision is a long long way behind the curve, but it is still possible to make a prediction today based on the specific facts of a new case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-10307593364894986272013-04-18T11:50:04.761+01:002013-04-18T11:50:04.761+01:00I 2 look forward to November. It'll be nice t...I 2 look forward to November. It'll be nice to have 2 judgments with arguments from 2 (different)parties on whether resolving the same mixture into 2 enantiomers is patentable, given 2 different national courts have taken 2 different views of 2 different experts and 2 different routes of resolution are possible.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com