The first decision from the UPC on sufficiency — handed down in the Amgen v. Sanofi case — provides the first clear guidance on how the court will address whether a patent’s disclosure is sufficient.
READ MORE
In this insight, Dehns Partner Rob Jackson and Conor Wilman from our Technology, Software and Engineering group explore the UPC’s Court of Appeal recent issues of two important decisions about how it will assess inventive step in patent cases.
READ MORE
The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) is consulting on possible changes to the UK design framework with the aims of improving design validity, simplifying the regime, and protecting emerging forms of design.
READ MORE
The G1/23 ruling from the European Patent Office marked a pivotal shift in how marketed products are treated as prior art, redefining the principles of reproducibility and disclosure across Europe. Dehns has collaborated with international patent experts to provide a global perspective on the ruling.
READ MORE
This decision concerned an application for provisional measures, in particular an anti-anti-suit injunction (‘AASI’), by Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited against the defendant Realtek Semiconductor Corporation
READ MORE
We look at the general principles of patent working requirements and take a closer look at some jurisdictions which have more stringent requirements on patent working post-grant. We also look at what you can do in order to prevent a third party from accessing your patented technology.
Dehns client, Blackout Technologies, is making headlines with its groundbreaking work in limiting smartphone use in schools. Recently featured in The Times, on BBC Radio 4 and other news outlets, the company is gaining well-deserved recognition for its innovative approach.
Icelandic performance artist Odee Friðriksson’s work, We’re Sorry—an attempt to tackle corporate wrongdoing—has floundered in the High Court. Dehns Trade Mark Attorney, Tiernan Graham, discusses.
In a recent decision, the UPC Court of Appeal ruled on the correction of errors in a patent by interpretation. This case, concerning Alexion Pharmaceuticals’ patent (EP3167888), underscores the importance of precise drafting and consistency in arguments used during patent litigation.
In a trade mark infringement case brought by Shorts International Limited (“SIL”) against Google LLC (“Google”) in the High Court of England and Wales, a decision by Michael Tappin KC towards the end of 2024 gave a salutary reminder regarding the scope of trade marks containing descriptive elements.
As of 1 January 2025 some changes to UK Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) practice will come into force in relation to human medicines.
Has a single UPC action yet been stayed in view of a parallel EPO opposition? The court is very reluctant to be delayed by EPO opposition proceedings and remains patentee-friendly in its general approach.
In its long-awaited judgment in SkyKick v Sky, the Supreme Court reversed significant aspects of the Court of Appeal’s decision on bad faith. This landmark ruling reshapes the interpretation of bad faith in UK trade mark law, with wide-ranging implications for the filing, enforcement, and scope of trade marks.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited (Avago) brought an infringement action against Tesla Germany GmBH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE (Tesla) on 1 June 2023, accusing Tesla of infringing Avago’s patent EP 1 612 910. Tesla contested Avago’s ownership of the patent, as well as counterclaiming for the invalidity of the patent.
The Claimant, Avago Technologies, sued the Defendants, Tesla Germany and Tesla Manufacturing, for infringement of a European Patent. The Patent was only still in force in Germany. Although the Patent was granted in English, the proceedings were conducted in German.
Subscribe here for updates on IP news, events and webinars.
|