In
Allergan], the Federal Court of Canada ruled that section
53.1 of the
Patent Act does not permit litigants to rebut
statements as to claim construction made by patent licensees based
on communications from the patentee during prosecution of the
patent. Rather, section 53.1 can only be invoked to rebut
inconsistent statements made by the patentee.
Section 53.1 was recently added to the Canadian
Patent
Act to preclude patentees from asserting a position during
litigation that was inconsistent with their previous statements to
the Patent Office. In the present case, the plaintiff Allergan Inc.
was an exclusive Canadian licensee of a drug owned by Kissei
(2)
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA / ACCESSWIRE / January 11, 2020 / Adial Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:ADIL; ADILW), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of treatments for addictions, today announced receipt of a Notice of Allowance for its third U.S. patent relating to the use of AD04 for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). The patent covers the use of the Company s lead product, AD04, as a treatment of Opioid Use Disorder in patients with a specific genetic biomarker in the serotonin transporter gene.
William Stilley, Chief Executive Officer of Adial Pharmaceuticals, commented, We are pleased to announce our third patent for AD04 for the treatment of Opioid Use Disorder, which is both a large and an underserved market. As we continue to study AD04 in our landmark ONWARD Phase 3 pivotal clinical trial for the treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder, our goal is to confirm the findings of the Phase 2b trial, which demonstrated the efficacy of AD04 as a tr
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
For the first time, the High Court adopted the doctrine of “patent exhaustion” to determine the nature and extent of monopoly rights of patent owners and departed from the “implied licence” theory, which had been used in Australia for more than a 100 years. Calidad Pty Ltd, distributor of refurbished printer cartridges, won a long-standing battle with Seiko Epson Corporation in its final appeal to the High Court. This decision has significant implications for both patent owners and businesses operating in industries in connection with the repair, refurbishment and recycling of goods and possibly, parallel importers.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
The influx of AI in various businesses intricate has forced the
companies to rethink the base of a business and change their
attitude towards more prospective business strategy including
innovation from AI. The Special Patent Court of High Court of
England & Wales in the case of
Stephen L Thaler Vs
Comptroller General of Patents, Design and Trade Mark
([2020] EWHC 2412 (Pat)) clarified that AI cannot be granted
a patent.
Brief of the case
This case is a celebrated case of the United Kingdom
(‘UK ). It starts from two patent applications,
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Twelve years from the third amendment of China s patent law,
the fourth amendment was approved by the Standing Committee of the
National People s Congress on October 17, 2020. The new
amendment will take effect on June 1, 2021. This article provides a
detailed review of the changes from the current patent law.
Enhanced Protection of Patent Rights
The first aspect of changes relates to enhanced protection of
patent rights. Specifically, it includes punitive damages,
increased statutory damage, reversed burden of proof, increased
fine for passing‐off, and extended time limit for initiating