Thus far, biosimilar uptake has been low in the United States, with market shares for most biosimilars under 10%. Given the cost-saving potential, trying to increase biosimilar uptake has been high on Congress's agenda and there are many bills pending before it dealing with issues from a variety of angles. But will they actually help to bring biosimilars to market more quickly?
The Supreme Court recently issued a highly anticipated decision in which it found that Ontario holds the copyright in plans of survey published by the third-party operator of the province's electronic land registry system. This case was the Supreme Court's first opportunity to examine the scope and application of Crown copyright in the nearly 100 years since the enactment of the applicable provision under the Copyright Act.
The physical appearance, name, expressions used and other distinctive components relating to or associated with copyrighted works or characters may enjoy trademark protection in Turkey irrespective of whether they are registered there. The aim of this approach is to prevent third parties from profiting from infringing trademarks.
A recent European Court of Justice judgment is good news for EU designers as it confirms what has already been stated by some Spanish courts – namely, that a design need not have artistic merit, aesthetic value or a particular visual attraction to qualify for copyright protection. Although the judgment was issued in response to a ruling by the Portuguese courts, it will undoubtedly have clear consequences throughout the European Union. This article examines the decision in view of the Spanish legal framework.
The Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) has released analysis of its decisions that were challenged before the courts in 2018. In addition to this analysis, the TRAB has provided comments on the admissibility of evidence in cancellation cases based on non-use for three consecutive years. This article provides an in-depth overview of the TRAB's findings.
Copycat products imported into South Africa often replicate well-known brands. In such cases, an analysis must be undertaken to determine whether the owner of the legitimate well-known brand can sue based on various grounds. In this respect, although word marks are often seen as the most important because they are a brand's primary name, from an enforceability perspective, filing a part mark can help to avoid ambiguity.
The Patent and Market Court of Appeal recently ordered several internet service providers to take blocking measures against Sci-Hub and LibGen. The case is interesting in light of the court's 2019 decision in a similar case on interim blocking measures in which it denied blocking injunctions due to a lack of proportionality and issued stern words about the evidence invoked by the claimant and the risk of overblocking legitimate content.
So-called 'notorious markets' are markets which are well known for selling counterfeit products, often to tourists and visitors looking for good deals on famous branded products. Brand victories in the fight against physical market sellers and landlords selling counterfeit goods are all too rare. However, there are a number of practical strategies that can be employed to maximise success in the battle against counterfeits.
The certificate of supplementary protection (CSP) regime recently celebrated its second anniversary. This article looks back on the previous year and provides an updated summary of approvals, rejections and pending applications, as well as further reminders and tips, including (among others) that it is important to consider the possibility of a CSP early in the drug development and approval lifecycle.
Eli Lilly was recently granted leave to amend its pleadings to introduce a new cause of action for the direct infringement of claims relating to a new use without including an allegation that the product had been directly infringed. However, the court ordered that all issues relating to the new cause of action must be bifurcated and tried at the quantification phase, after all other issues have been determined.
An updated Manual of Patent Office Practice (MOPOP) was recently published, explaining Patent Office administrative and examination practice effective from 30 October 2019. The updated MOPOP provides important information as to how the Patent Office will handle certain aspects of patent practice under the Patent Act and Patent Rules. Most significantly, the updated MOPOP provides details concerning (among other things) the new requirement for the submission of certified copies of priority documents.
Industrial property lawyers in Italy have been given cause for reflection following a recent European Court of Justice decision which was expected to clarify whether the legislatures of EU member states can grant copyright protection for designs subject to additional requirements to those required for all other copyrighted works. This issue is of particular importance in Italy, as copyright protection is granted to designs on the condition that they have 'artistic value', as assessed by the courts, as well as a creative aspect.
The Madrid Court of Appeal recently confirmed a Madrid Trial Court Number 11 decision which had sentenced a Spanish resident of Chinese origin to five months' imprisonment for the possession of 9,317 counterfeit items of clothing – including t-shirts which infringed FC Barcelona's IP rights – for commercial purposes. The appeal court also confirmed the trial court's order of a fine, additional penalties, civil liability payments and compensation for legal costs.
The Supreme Court recently issued a notable judgment concerning the work of a deceased artist and the alleged infringement of his moral copyright. The decision underlines that it is difficult to limit the activities of people who have been gifted the work of an artist even after the artist's death, especially in the case of a close personal relationship between the artist and the beneficiaries.
The Federal Court recently released the first decision in which the scope of Section 53.1 of the Patent Act – the so-called 'file wrapper estoppel' provision – was considered. The court's decision suggests that, notwithstanding the clear language of the provision, foreign prosecution histories may be admissible for the purposes of claim construction in certain extraordinary circumstances.
The concept of plausibility has emerged in numerous prosecution cases in recent years, with global trends suggesting a shift towards treating it as an additional, standalone patentability requirement. However, some commentators have argued that plausibility should not be considered an independent patentability condition due to, among other things, the different criteria for evaluating plausibility.
The Hague District Court recently rendered a judgment regarding an inventor's failure to cooperate with the exploitation of his patents. The claimant had alleged that the defendant's refusal to cooperate with the transfer of the patent to a foundation (which would have subsequently granted the claimant a licence) had prevented it from exploiting the patent, including sub-licensing it to third parties.
Two requirements under the new Patent Rules warrant particular attention for new Canadian patent applications and national phase entries: the Patent Cooperation Treaty national phase entry deadline and the requirement for certified copies of priority documents. Applicants should plan now to ensure that applications under the new rules enter the Canadian national phase within 30 months of the earliest priority date.
The recent amendments to the Patented Medicines Regulations have been the subject of two court challenges launched by groups of innovative pharmaceutical companies – one in the Quebec Superior Court and the other in the Federal Court. The applicants before the Quebec court brought a constitutional challenge to the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board provisions of the Patent Act and the regulations, while the applicants before the Federal Court challenged the validity of the amending regulations.
The amended Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, which came into force two years ago, heralded significant changes to the IP landscape for pharmaceutical companies in Canada. Among other changes, the amendments ended dual litigation and provided innovators with a right of appeal. This article provides an update as of the second anniversary of the amendments.