PATENTS – infringement – standard patent for a pharmaceutical composition containing certain active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) – claim construction – whether claim covers a pharmaceutical composition where the API is in the form of a complex in which the ions are associated by non-covalent bonds
PATENTS – identity of the person skilled in the art – where the person skilled in the art is understood as a “team” – discussion of the characteristics of the person skilled in the art
PATENTS – validity – lack of inventive step – availability of prior art information – whether person skilled in the art could be reasonably expected to have ascertained and regarded as relevant certain prior art publications
PATENTS – validity – lack of inventive step – discussion of the reformulated “Cripps question” – whether obviousness established on the evidence
PATENTS – extension of patent term – whether extension validly granted – whether rectification of the Register of Patents should be ordered
Related cases
-
UbiPark Pty Ltd v TMA Capital Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 885
PATENTS – infringement – patent for system, method and computer program for an access control system for controlling access to a restricted area (eg, a car park) – where claim 1 comprised a system including a communication system and a computer program executable by a mobile communication device (such as a smartphone) wherein the device…
-
ToolGen Incorporated v Fisher (No 2) [2023] FCA 794
PATENTS – appeal against decision of delegate of Commissioner of Patents upholding opposition to patent application (“PA”) for compositions and methods using the CRISPR/Cas9 system for genome editing in eukaryotic cells – identity of person skilled in the art (“PSA”) – whether PSA comprises a team including a microbiologist with expertise in CRISPR/Cas system in…
-
Calix Limited v Grenof Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 378
PATENTS – claim for method of producing hydroxide slurries – construction of claim – whether claim infringed – whether s 121A of Patents Act 1990 (Cth) (“the Act”) applied to place onus on the respondents – whether Court satisfied that it was very likely that respondents’ product was made by the patented process – whether claim…
