Teva UK Ltd and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (‘TEVA’) instructed Daniel Alexander QC and Mark Chacksfield as part of their legal team in this patent dispute relating to combined dose psoriasis ointments.
TEVA contended that two patents owned by Leo Pharma (‘LEO’), the Defendant, were invalid for obviousness, insufficiency and added matter. LEO alleged that TEVA’s intended production of a generic would be infringing.
Birss J., in the Patents Court, found that both patents were invalid for obviousness. As such, his judgment did not need to consider insufficiency, added matter or infringement. It was found that the inventions were obvious to a skilled formulator at all stages of development, having regard to the pleaded prior art, and that the patents were accordingly invalid.
+44(0)20 7405 4321
clerks@8newsquare.co.uk