Appeals, Judgments, And The Product-By-Process Puzzle
Facts
Vifor Pharma claims ownership of Ferric Carboxymaltose (FCM), a novel iron complex used for therapy. Despite the patent expiration, Vifor highlights 12 years of success and global recognition for FCM, overcoming prior limitations in iron preparation.
Plaintiff's Contention
Vifor argues for the ongoing relevance and novelty of FCM. They challenge the court’s reliance on foreign precedents, dispute the product-by-process interpretation, and criticize the handling of novelty and inventiveness issues.
Defendant Contention
MSD and Dr. Reddy’s oppose interference and assert a product-by-process limitation. They challenge FCM’s novelty, question the relevance of International Nonproprietary Names (INN) allocation, and advocate for a focused infringement analysis.
Corona Remedies Contention
Corona Remedies emphasizes the novelty of using oxidized maltodextrin. They argue for limited protection and challenge the justification for a product-by-process patent.
Prior Interim Orders
Vifor challenges infringement orders, noting a factual error in the proceedings.
Judgement
Prima facie, there is likely infringement due to the similarity of marks and goods, but the defendant may be protected under Section 30(2)(a) for indicating product characteristics. Passing-off claim is rejected based on dissimilarities and price differences. Overall, the defendant may be entitled to Section 30(2)(a) protection, and no injunction is warranted at this stage.
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Appeals, Judgments, And The Product-By-Process Puzzle
Facts
Vifor Pharma claims ownership of Ferric Carboxymaltose (FCM), a novel iron complex used for therapy. Despite the patent expiration, Vifor highlights 12 years of success and global recognition for FCM, overcoming prior limitations in iron preparation.
Plaintiff's Contention
Vifor argues for the ongoing relevance and novelty of FCM. They challenge the court’s reliance on foreign precedents, dispute the product-by-process interpretation, and criticize the handling of novelty and inventiveness issues.
Defendant Contention
MSD and Dr. Reddy’s oppose interference and assert a product-by-process limitation. They challenge FCM’s novelty, question the relevance of International Nonproprietary Names (INN) allocation, and advocate for a focused infringement analysis.
Corona Remedies Contention
Corona Remedies emphasizes the novelty of using oxidized maltodextrin. They argue for limited protection and challenge the justification for a product-by-process patent.
Prior Interim Orders
Vifor challenges infringement orders, noting a factual error in the proceedings.
Judgement
Prima facie, there is likely infringement due to the similarity of marks and goods, but the defendant may be protected under Section 30(2)(a) for indicating product characteristics. Passing-off claim is rejected based on dissimilarities and price differences. Overall, the defendant may be entitled to Section 30(2)(a) protection, and no injunction is warranted at this stage.
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Appeals, Judgments, And The Product-By-Process Puzzle
Facts
Vifor Pharma claims ownership of Ferric Carboxymaltose (FCM), a novel iron complex used for therapy. Despite the patent expiration, Vifor highlights 12 years of success and global recognition for FCM, overcoming prior limitations in iron preparation.
Plaintiff's Contention
Vifor argues for the ongoing relevance and novelty of FCM. They challenge the court’s reliance on foreign precedents, dispute the product-by-process interpretation, and criticize the handling of novelty and inventiveness issues.
Defendant Contention
MSD and Dr. Reddy’s oppose interference and assert a product-by-process limitation. They challenge FCM’s novelty, question the relevance of International Nonproprietary Names (INN) allocation, and advocate for a focused infringement analysis.
Corona Remedies Contention
Corona Remedies emphasizes the novelty of using oxidized maltodextrin. They argue for limited protection and challenge the justification for a product-by-process patent.
Prior Interim Orders
Vifor challenges infringement orders, noting a factual error in the proceedings.
Judgement
Prima facie, there is likely infringement due to the similarity of marks and goods, but the defendant may be protected under Section 30(2)(a) for indicating product characteristics. Passing-off claim is rejected based on dissimilarities and price differences. Overall, the defendant may be entitled to Section 30(2)(a) protection, and no injunction is warranted at this stage.
Amul Strikes Back: Court Defends Iconic Trademark Against ‘Amuleti’ Infringement
Changing Trends in Trademark Enforcement Rights
Copyright Infringement – Section 63, A Cognizable and Non-Bailable Offence
Draft geographical Indications of Goods(Registration and Protection) (Amendment) Rules, 2023
Connect with our Experts to resolve your legal issues!
KAnalysis is a boutique full service law firm, well positioned to represent its international and domestic clients.
© 2007 – 2024 KAnalysis Consultant Private Limited. All Rights Reserved