tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post5034393023165936149..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Novartis v. Teva: Patent rivalries meet again, this time on a non-negligible injunction.Verónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-86390924730954377792018-07-01T14:04:52.566+01:002018-07-01T14:04:52.566+01:00I am not a specialist of French legislation, but g...I am not a specialist of French legislation, but giving in a primary injunction 13.000.000 € of damages for a patent which will fall in the public domain in July 2019 seems a priori a bit high, even if the alleged infringing products are what can be called a block-buster. <br /><br />That in the decision a fee of 40% has been chosen to the benefice of Novartis in order to compensate for the commercial and the moral prejudice is surprising, if on the other hand the judge considers that the profit margin for TEVA was determined to be 50%. Those figures might be correct, but are nevertheless surprising. <br /><br />Another reason is that the decision is not a decision on the substance, but purely provisional taken by a single judge.<br /><br />A further comment: should a physician prescribe separately Valsartan and Amlodipine he would not be an infringer. It seems from the decision that those products are already known for themselves and could be combined, albeit not in a single pill, see page 31 of the decision. To merely state that the only purpose was to determine if the association is absent of side effects and that no effect on hypertension was sought for seems a bit short for a convincing argument. It seems a bit far away from common sense not to check whether the combination pill has an effect an effect on blood pressure, and merely be satisfied by just checking whether they interfere together. <br /><br />The OD maintained the patent, but this decision has been appealed and it is far to early to have an idea of the outcome as the proprietor has not replied to the appeals and the BA not scheduled an OP. <br /><br />The Paris TGI has often delivered surprising decisions, which led to some eyebrows raising, this is clearly another one of this kind.<br />Where is inventive step?noreply@blogger.com