Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT BANSAL
F- Hoffmann -La Roche Ag – Appellant
Versus
Zydus Lifesciences Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. patent filings and details (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant's arguments against patents (Para 3) |
| 3. plaintiffs' claims and context (Para 4 , 9) |
| 4. claims of infringement analysis (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. court's observations on evidence and disclosure (Para 18 , 22 , 30) |
| 6. requirements for applying section 104a (Para 31 , 32) |
| 7. court's conclusion on the application (Para 73) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BANSAL, J.
I.A. 5827/2024 (seeking constitution of a confidentiality club)
1. The present suit has been filed inter alia seeking relief of permanent injunction restraining infringement of the following two Indian patents (hereinafter collectively referred to as the ‘suit patents’):
a. Indian patent no. IN 268632 titled as ‘PHARMACEUTICAL FORMULATION COMPRISING HER2 ANTIBODY’ (hereinafter ‘IN’632’) is a product patent which relates to an aqueous pharmaceutical formulation comprising Pertuzumab and excipients such as sucrose, histidine acetate buffer, polysorbate such that the pH of the said formulation is between 5.5-6.5.
b. Indian patent no. IN 464646 titled as ‘PERTUZUMAB VARIANTS AND EVALUATION THEREOF’ (hereinafter ‘IN’646’) is a process patent which relates to the method for making a composition
Section 104A mandates that for defendants in patent infringement cases, the products must be identical for burden of proof to shift, emphasizing the distinction required for biologics compared to con....
Discovery of documents is essential for fair adjudication in disputes over bio-similar drugs, and confidentiality claims cannot obstruct this process.
In patent infringement cases, public interest and product-to-claim mapping are crucial, and an injunction cannot be justified without decisive mapping, especially for life-saving drugs.
Point of Law : Intellectual Property Law - Revocation of patents - Appropriateness of Bioavailability and Bioequivalency as Pre- Market Clearance Considerations” by Jane Moffitt, which opined that “a....
Interim injunctions in patent cases require a prima facie case; valid disclosure of patents must be clear, and a patentee cannot claim multiple patents for the same invention without significant diff....
Validity of specific patents is upheld while assessing distinctions between coverage and disclosure, emphasizing protection of intellectual property rights against infringement.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
