化工与制药
发明创造
法律文件归档
我们起草并提交新化工发明的专利申请，范围从药品，化妆品到食品。我们的客户范围从中小型企业到大型跨国公司。由于我们的工作范围广泛，无论案例大小，我们都能够根据客户的需求定制服务。
诉讼
我们在专利诉讼方面拥有丰富的经验。不仅在英国和欧洲，而且在美洲，亚洲以及其他的国家和地区，施利希在当地司法管辖区值得信赖的专利律师的协助下，也处理了大量的专利产权案例。对多个司法管辖区的专利法的详细了解，有助于施利希协助客户有效地准备和执行全球专利诉讼战略。
化工与制药
异议与上诉
诉讼工作
无论是对专利侵权或专利维权的案例，施利希的异议和上诉团队在诉讼事务中都很积极活跃。我们团队在处理欧洲专利局的多方异议和上诉方面有几十年的经验。施利希在有利的情况下与其他异议方合作，并在诉讼程序的书面和口头部分有效地提出论据。
自由使用权
除了保护客户的专利外，我们还定期就第三方专利权引起的侵权风险提供建议。我们能够对可能与客户的商业活动相关的第三方专利权进行检索，并就我们识别的任何侵权风险以及为降低这些风险可以采取的措施提出相应的建议。
近期案例解析
阅读施利希团队撰写的化工与制药行业相关的最新案例解析。
Landmark CJEU judgement opens up new avenues for European patent litigation
In a recent landmark judgement, the CJEU confirmed the possibility of European patent holders being able to consolidate actions for patent infringement across multiple EU and non-EU member states at a single EU court. For patent holders looking to assert their IP in an efficient, and likely more cost-effective and harmonious manner, the implications of the CJEU decision on enforcement strategies before both national courts and the UPC are noteworthy.
When it comes to Post Filed Data, the Earlier the Better – A Brief Reminder Following G 2/21
This recent decision of the EPO Boards of Appeal, T 1865/22, reminds applicants to include clear details of the claimed technical effect in the application as filed and to file evidence in support of said technical effect as early as possible
UniQure’s Haemophilia B gene-therapy patent found valid – and infringed by Pfizer
The range of gene-therapies available to patients is ever expanding and it was only a matter of time before a conflict arose that had to be considered by the UK patent courts. Now uniQure has defended its patent for a Haemophilia B gene therapy against a revocation action brought by Pfizer.
The Federal Circuit clarifies conflicts arising between Patent Term Adjustment and Obviousness-type Double Patenting
We perceive a sigh of relief from some patent holders following issue of the US Federal Circuit’s decision in Allergan USA v. MSN Labs, 24-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2014) (“Allergan”). This decision appears to forestall the revocation of some patents following the concerning precedential Federal Circuit decision In re Cellect (No. 22-1293) (“Cellect”).
What Satisfies the Palate of the EPO’s Boards of Appeal? Fish Oil and Fruit Juice, Apparently…
In a recent decision, the EPO’s Boards of Appeal have confirmed the importance of filing data to support arguments relating to sufficiency of disclosure in EPO opposition proceedings. The patent concerned related to a mixture of fish oil and fruit juice which was alleged to have anticancer properties. The opponent argued the constituents required to achieve the anticancer effect were not sufficiently disclosed, but failed to provide enough data to convince the Board of Appeal. Hence, the Board was satisfied the claimed composition was sufficiently disclosed and ordered that the patent be maintained in amended form.
Boards of Appeal Introduce New Broad Interpretation of “Substance or Composition” in the Context of Second Medical Use Claims
In this decision the Board has diverged from previous case law establishing that second medical use claims were restricted to products having a chemical mode of action and instead the Board ruled that “substance or composition” should stretch to any product which may be defined by its chemical composition, regardless of the mode of action.
Food for fork: stretchy cheese and contradictory post-filed evidence
T 0629/22 considered how the credibility of a claimed invention should be addressed in the face of contradictory evidence
Therapeutic Effect – a Higher Bar for Novelty than for Sufficiency at the EPO
EPO medical use claims are interpreted to include the physiological or technical effect of the treatment as being a functional feature of the claim. However, this interpretation yields different bars for novelty and sufficiency, as confirmed by EPO TBA Decision T 0209/22.
联系我们
我们的英国和欧洲专利律师和特许商标律师团队具有丰富的知识和经验，能够协助客户满足其知识产权各个方面的法律需求。
立即联系我们，了解我们如何帮助您和您的企业的更多信息。
