Ms Núria Ribera

Núria Ribera

Lawyer biography

Nuria obtained an LL.M in Intellectual Property and Competition Law from the Queen Mary University of London in 2014.

She completed a Master’s degree in Private International Law at the Barcelona Bar Association in 2013.

Nuria holds a degree in Law from the Pompeu Fabra University of Barcelona.

Professional Experience
Nuria joined Grau & Angulo in 2015.

She worked as a legal researcher for Managing Intellectual Property magazine between 2014 and 2015.

Previously she contributed as a pro bono legal advisor at the Queen Mary Legal Advice centre (qLegal) between 2013 and 2014.

Nuria undertook various internships in the Litigation and Dispute Resolution Department of Clifford Chance LLP in Barcelona as well as in the Legal Department of Damm Group between 2011 and 2013.

Practice Areas 
Trademark and patent litigation.

Spanish, English and Catalan.

Professional Associations
Member of Barcelona Bar Association.


Intellectual Property

Preliminary injunction request dismissed due to prima facie invalidity of asserted SPC
Spain | 15 October 2018

Barcelona Commercial Court Number 5 recently dismissed a preliminary injunction request filed by Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) regarding the commercialisation of generic medicinal products. The defendants had opposed the request by alleging the invalidity of MSD's supplementary protection certificate (SPC) on the basis that it was invalid according to the EU SPC for Medicinal Products Regulation.

Barcelona patent court upholds valsartan-amlodipine patent invalidity
Spain | 18 June 2018

The Barcelona Commercial Court Number 4 recently dismissed a patent infringement action brought by Novartis against the first generics in Spain of its valsartan and amlodipine medicinal product for the treatment of hypertension. The court upheld the defendants' counterclaim for invalidity of the asserted patent. Novartis has appealed this decision before the Barcelona Court of Appeal.

Appeal court confirms revocation of ex parte preliminary injunctions against oxycodone/naloxone generics
Spain | 11 June 2018

The Barcelona Court of Appeal recently issued two decisions confirming the Barcelona Commercial Court Numbers 1 and 4 rulings revoking the preliminary injunctions that they had granted ex parte at Mundipharma's request against the first generics in Spain of its oxycodone/naloxone medicinal product for the treatment of pain. In its decisions, the Barcelona Court of Appeal concluded that Mundipharma's patent was prima facie invalid due to added subject matter, as argued by the defendants.

Preliminary injunctions revoked due to prima facie invalidity of Truvada SPC
Spain | 08 January 2018

Barcelona Commercial Court Number 4 recently lifted the preliminary injunctions that it had previously granted ex parte at the request of Gilead against Mylan and Teva for the alleged imminent infringement of Gilead's supplementary protection certificate (SPC) for the combination of tenofovir disoproxil and emtricitabine. The defendants successfully opposed the preliminary injunctions, alleging the invalidity of the SPC and invoking the applicable European Court of Justice case law.

Barcelona courts lift preliminary injunctions previously granted ex parte in oxycodone/naloxone case
Spain | 02 October 2017

Through two recent decisions, Barcelona Commercial Court Number 4 and Barcelona Commercial Court Number 1 lifted the preliminary injunctions that they had previously granted ex parte in relation to the imminent market launch of two oxycodone/naloxone generic medicinal products. This is the first time that a preliminary injunction has been revoked or refused in Spain based on indicia of invalidity of the asserted patent due to added matter.

Use of well-known third-party mark as corporate name constitutes trademark infringement
Spain | 18 April 2016

Two recent Alicante Community Trademark Court No 2 judgments have confirmed that the use of a well-known third-party mark as a corporate name or as a domain name constitutes trademark infringement. In both cases, the court took into consideration the use of the infringing names – including whether they had been put to real and genuine use – and ordered the infringing parties to modify them or face dissolution.