Intellectual property

Cannabinoid patenting – a rolling stone?

Marc Döring

Late in 2018, medicinal cannabis[1] was downgraded from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 (medically allowed) in the Misuse of Drugs Regulations in the UK. The resulting flurry of activity in the mainstream news media about the use of cannabinoids and similar substances has been inescapable. Whilst there is arguably still a lot of hype around Read More

China: Amendment to Drug Administration Law

David Shen

On 26 August 2019, the China’s National People’s Congress passed the amended Drug Administration Law (the Amended DAL) which will take effect on 1 December. The new law brings in some changes while codifying many existing practices. We summarise in this article the key highlights, including intellectual property related rules, of the Amended DAL. 1. Redefine Read More

Dutch medicines regulator updates policy on how to carve out patented indications

Lars Braams

On 8 May 2019, the Dutch Medicines Agency (CBG/MEB) published a revised policy on generic manufacturers’ ability to carve out patented indications from their product information (that is, leaflet and summary of product characteristics). This new policy is a direct result of the CJEU’s preliminary ruling in Staat der Nederlanden v Warner-Lambert Company LLC (Case Read More

More’s the Pity – Rules on Distinctiveness

David Stone

A recent General Court decision emphasises the difficulty of registering slogans as trade marks, including for specialised medical devices. Medrobotics Corp had applied for registration of SEE MORE. REACH MORE. TREAT MORE. as an EU trade mark (Medrobotics v EUIPO T-555/18) in relation to articulated arms and probes for medical diagnostic and surgical use. Medrobotics’ Read More

UK High Court orders pre-action delivery up of samples for infringement testing and considers use in other jurisdictions

Rafi Allos

In Boehringer Ingelheim v Generics,* the English High Court ordered the rarely-used remedy of pre-action inspection of property, for the purpose of allowing experiments needed to assess patent infringement. The case provides a useful reminder of the powers of the Court in this area, as well as providing a reference as to how the Court Read More