Accord Healthcare Limited & Ors v The Regents of The University of California & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2524 (Pat)
Samsung Bioepis UK Ltd v Janssen Biotech, Inc.
26 September 2024
[2024] EWHC 2442 (Pat)
High Court
A company's patent was deemed obvious based on existing knowledge. Their attempt to appeal this decision was rejected because their arguments weren't strong enough and they should have raised them earlier.
Key Facts
- •Samsung Bioepis UK Limited (Claimant) sued Janssen Biotech, Inc. (Defendant) for patent infringement.
- •The patent was held invalid for obviousness over the 'Sands Slides' document.
- •The appeal focuses on the interpretation of 'corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CSFCR)' in the patent claim.
- •The judge found that the patent claim does not require patients to be steroid-free at the start of treatment, but the drug must be capable of treating both steroid and non-steroid patients.
- •The judge's decision combined findings on the expectation of treatment effect for both steroid and non-steroid patient groups.
- •Janssen argued that combining these groups was impermissible and lacked sufficient evidence.
Legal Principles
Obviousness of a patent claim requires consideration of the expectation of success based on prior art.
Patent Law
The court interprets patent claims to determine their scope and meaning.
Patent Law
Outcomes
Permission to appeal was refused.
The judge found the argument regarding the impermissibility of combining patient groups to be hopeless and should have been raised at trial. The judge also had grave doubts about the success of the other arguments.