In the second application, the Court considered allegations of non-infringement and validity of a second patent relating to fenofibrate. The Court dismissed the application for a prohibition order.
Again, the credibility of witnesses and their admissibility as experts was challenged. The challenges as to impartiality were dismissed. As in the case above, one of the witness’ testimony was given little weight as he did not have the credentials of a person skilled in the art.
In this case, after considering the evidence of noninfringement, the Court found the allegations as to non-infringement justified. Again, it went on to consider the validity issues raised. The allegations as to anticipation, obviousness, claims broader, inutility, lack of sound prediction and insufficiency were all found to not be justified