A clear mistake in a claim term cannot be corrected through claim construction

In GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No 2) Limited v Generic Partners Pty Limited [2018] FCAFC 71, the Full Federal Court has found that terms used in claims cannot be interpreted beyond their plain meaning.  Such a decision emphasises that great care is required when drafting claims that contain words or phrases that have a

Amendments to a patent during court proceedings – how much transparency is required?

In Apotex Pty Ltd v ICOS Corporation [2017] FCA 466, the Federal Court has provided guidance regarding the level of disclosure required by a patentee in order for a court to exercise its discretion in allowing amendments to the specification during court proceedings.   Eli Lilly and Company (Lilly) is the holding company of ICOS

Another small victory for Australian Government in pursuit of damages for PBS “over-payments”

The Australian Government has had another small victory in the most recent interlocutory decision in the clopidogrel damages enquiry, which is likely to be the test case for its claims for reimbursement of PBS “over-payments” for the patentee’s listed pharmaceutical products during the period of an interlocutory injunction restraining generic entry (and consequent price drops),

Commonwealth’s damages claim for overpaying on patented products continues

The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia has rejected an argument that the Commonwealth is precluded by provisions of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) from seeking damages pursuant to undertakings given by two patentees when obtaining interlocutory relief preventing the launch of generic pharmaceutical products. The Commonwealth’s claims, in one case including

Three strikes, you’re out: Rosuvastatin generics in the clear

The High Court of Australia handed down its decision yesterday in the appeal by AstraZeneca (AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Pty Ltd (2015) HCA 30), against last year’s ruling by the Full Court of the Federal Court,  affirming the Full Court’s decision that AstraZeneca’s low dose rosuvastatin patent was obvious.   The High Court has unanimously

Heading off generic market entry which does not patent infringe

A preliminary discovery application brought in the Federal Court of Australia by GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (GSK) shortly before Christmas has sparked interest in the potential for patentees to prevent non-patent infringing generic pharmaceutical products entering the Australian market. Background facts The paracetamol market in Australia saw significant legal attention in the last months of

Page 1 of 212