We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 40

General Court of the EU Confirms Fines Imposed on Lundbeck and Generic Drug Manufacturers for Entering into Patent Settlements
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • September 22 2016

On 8 September 2016, the General Court of the EU (GCEU) handed down five judgments upholding a decision by the Commission of 19 June 2013 imposing


European Commission fines pharmaceutical companies for Citalopram pay-for-delay agreements
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • June 30 2013

On 19 June 2013, the European Commission announced a fine of 93.8 million for H. Lundbeck AS (Lundbeck) and a further 52.2 million of fines levied


EU Court Confirms European Commission’s Decision on Pay-for-Delay Agreements
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • Denmark, European Union
  • October 20 2016

On 8 September 2016, the General Court of the European Union upheld the European Commission’s decision in which the antitrust regulator imposed fines


What did you say? $31 million awarded for infringement of hearing aid patent
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • November 29 2012

In a case involving the alleged infringement of two patents related to hearing aids, one of which was found under judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) to not be infringed


Commission publishes fourth monitoring report on pharmaceutical patent settlements
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • February 11 2014

The European Commission has published its fourth Report on the Monitoring of Patent Settlements (the report), concerning pharmaceutical patent


UK Supreme Court steps into line with Europe, but rejects U.S. approach
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union, United Kingdom, USA
  • November 30 2011

The UK’s highest court recently considered the provisions of the European Patent Convention (EPC) centering on the “susceptible of industrial application” requirement in the context of a patent describing a DNA sequence for a new protein, Neutrokine-α, which was a member of a group of similar proteins known as the TNF ligand superfamily


CJEU actavis and Eli Lilly SPC judgments
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • January 22 2014

In addition to giving its decision in Georgetown University C-48412, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down two other


CJEU Georgetown University SPC judgment
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • January 22 2014

Following hot on the heels of the 14 November 2013 opinion given by the Advocate General in Georgetown University C-48412, the Court of Justice of


Advocate General opinion on the interpretation of “first marketing authorisation” for Supplementary Protection Certificates
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • June 7 2012

Advocate General Trstenjak (the AG) has rendered an opinion in a preliminary reference relating to Neurim Pharmaceuticals Ltd 1991 C-13011 that it should be possible to grant a Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) for a second medicinal product that comprises the same active ingredient as a medicinal product covered by a prior marketing authorisation (MA), if the scope of the basic patent protecting the second medicinal product does not extend to the earlier medicinal product


SPCs: is a simplistic system becoming too complicated?
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • November 22 2010

Obtaining and enforcing Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) for medicinal products in the European Union is a fertile ground for challenge and the law is still unclear in a number of key areas