Schlich Ltd +44(0) 1903 717001 info@schlich.co.uk
  • EN
  • 中文
  • 한국어
  • 日本語
  • Client Portal
Schlich Ltd
  • Our Firm
  • IP Services
    • Patents
    • EPO Oppositions & Appeals
    • UKIPO Proceedings
    • UPC Proceedings
    • Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • IP Strategy
  • Patent Specialities
    • Life Sciences & Biotech
    • Chemical & Pharmaceutical
    • Mechanical, Engineering and Physics
    • Software, Electronics and Communications
  • Insights
  • Inventors’ Zone
  • Contact
Select Page
Pemetrexed in the Court of Milan: Fresenius v Eli Lilly

Pemetrexed in the Court of Milan: Fresenius v Eli Lilly

by Alex Bajjon | Nov 1, 2017 | US & International

The Case In 2016, Fresenius requested a declaration of non-infringement in Italy for its pemetrexed diacid product in respect of Lilly’s European patent EP1313508. Lilly’s patent was amended during prosecution to specify in claim 1 that pemetrexed disodium...
Unjustified Threats: Changes to UK Intellectual Property Law

Unjustified Threats: Changes to UK Intellectual Property Law

by Sean Hughes | Sep 1, 2017 | UK

When is a Threat Actionable? In determining whether a threat has been made, the following question should be asked:- Would a reasonable person in the shoes of the recipient understand from the communication that a patent exists and that legal action is intended for an...
An End To The Promise Doctrine in Canada

An End To The Promise Doctrine in Canada

by Juliette Boynton | Aug 1, 2017 | US & International

In 2010 Apotex started to sell a generic version of this drug and AstraZeneca brought an action against Apotex for patent infringement. In response Apotex counter-claimed to have the patent declared invalid. In the first instance decision the Judge held that the...
Why the First Filing Needs to be Right, and How to Achieve This

Why the First Filing Needs to be Right, and How to Achieve This

by George Schlich | Aug 1, 2017 | EPO

Introduction Of all people involved in the filing, prosecution and enforcement of patent rights, it could be argued that none are as important as the drafters of the initial application. Regardless of the skill and experience of the litigators, certain errors or...
Pitfalls associated with an Interim Injunction

Pitfalls associated with an Interim Injunction

by Carolyn Haywood | Aug 1, 2017 | Briefings, UK

The recent interim Patents Court decision of Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Limited v (1) Dr Reddy’s Laboratories (2) Sandoz Limited (and others) [2017] EWHC 1433 (Pat) provides guidance on how the court calculates damages associated with an interim injunction and...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Search

Recent Posts

  • Squeezed Out! AstraZeneca overturns Wyeth’s $107.5M Infringement Award
  • UPC Court of Appeal Confirms Lock-in Danger
  • When “Monotherapy” Means Monotherapy: A Cautionary Tale on Claim Interpretation and Added Matter at the EPO
  • Has the EPO TBA Demolished the Essentiality Test?
  • A Clear Way Forward for Description Amendments: Decision Issued in G 1/25

Recent Comments

    CIPA
    IPReg
    CITMA
    • Instagram

    Services

    • Patents
    • EPO Oppositions & Appeals
    • UKIPO Proceedings
    • UPC Proceedings
    • Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • IP Strategy

    About

    • Our Firm
    • Careers
    • Our People
    • Policies

    Contact

    • Contact
    • Inventors Zone
    © 2026 Schlich, All rights reserved | Built by Molokini
    European Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys. Schlich Ltd is a UK limited company, registration no. 05238489, address: 9 St Catherine's Road, Littlehampton, West Sussex, BN17 5HS.