Glenmark's 'hindsight analysis' of Merck's diabetes-patent molecule, impermissible; Grants permanent injunction
HC grants permanent injunction against Glenmark for infringing Merck's drug patent 'Sitagliptin' used for lowering blood sugar levels in diabetic patients (Type II diabetes), restrains from making / using / selling Sitagliptin Phosphate Monohydrate or any other salt of Sitagliptin; Rejects Glenmark's contention that suit patent lacks industrial application, thus should be revoked u/s 64(1)(g) of Patent Act, holds that Merck's drugs are used in treating type II diabetes, inasmuch as, defendant itself is manufacturing, marketing and selling Sitagliptin Phosphate Monohydrate of which Sitagliptin forms the bulk component; Further rejects Glenmark's contention that Merck's patent was overbroad and Markush claim covering billion of compounds, thus should be revoked, holds that claim of Sitagliptin patent was specifically made and could not be said to be wide or broad; Notes that Glenmark itself has acknowledged in its patents that Sitagliptin with pharmaceutically acceptable salt was disclosed in Merck's US patent, holds, "Defendant cannot be permitted to blow hot and cold in the same breath"; Dismisses 'lack of inventive step' & 'obviousness' defences raised by Glenmark, absent proof, observes that Glenmark had done hindsight analysis which was impermissible, holds that "Mere comparison of chemical structure is not sufficient, inasmuch as, picking up parts of chemical structures of different patents and clubbing them will also not be sufficient,.. as a hindsight analysis."; With respect to Glenmark's contention that infringement can't be established by mere comparison of labels & molecule structures, observes that infringement in instant case is sought not only on packaging but by other ocular as well as documentary evidence on record; Also holds that, "defendant cannot conveniently disown what has been written on the packagings and the product inserts, which is a disclosure to the public at large including the doctors and consumers of the drug about the contents used and utility of the drug"; On Glenamrk's plea of public interest, HC holds that "The invention of plaintiffs, that is, Sitagliptin improves the efficient management of the condition of a patient suffering from type II diabetes by inhibiting the DPP-IV enzyme. Merely because defendant, who is manufacturing generic version, is selling a tablet at a lower price than that of plaintiffs cannot be made ground to decline injunction against the defendant, who has been found to have been infringing the invention":Delhi HC
The ruling was delivered by Justice A.K. Pathak.
Advocates Pravin Anand, Archana Shankar, Tusha Malhotra, Udita M Patro, Nupur Maithani and Devender Rawat argued on behalf of the plaintiffs. Defendants were represented by Senior Advocate Pratibha M Singh alongwith Advocates Saya Choudhary, Manika Arora, Archana Singh, Aditya Jayaraj, Mitali Agarwal and Shobhit Choudhary.
PFA.
CBDT Circular No. 17 Dated 6-10-2015
Finance Act, 2013 amendment for computing distance 'aerially' for the purposes of 'agricultural land' u/s 2(14)(iii)(b) is prospective in nature.
Bombay HC in Maltibai R. Kadu had held that for period prior to AY 2014-15, the distance should be measured having regard to the shortest road distance.
Apple Inc. gets India patent for compact antenna; No fresh SEBI probe in NSEL scam
Apple Inc. gets India patent for compact antenna; No fresh SEBI probe in NSEL scam
HC directs Govt. to enhance security verification for MCA portal; Intruders face prosecution
Division Bench of Bombay HC, in a sou-moto Criminal Public Interest Litigation, directs Ministry of Corporate Affairs ('MCA'), Ministry of Information & Technology, and Ministry of Telecommunications to examine the feasibility of adopting two-factor method of security verification for accessing MCA portal; HC notes that unauthorized persons are accessing the MCA portal / Registrar of Companies ('RoC') network and gaining access to digital records, which are being manipulated to significant prejudice and detriment of companies; Suggests that logging into MCA portal should require one or more security temporary passwords or codes generated in real time and transmitted to specially designated e-mail id / mobile number (or both) of the user for enabling access to MCA portal; Notes that Digital Signature Certificates (DSCs) are issued solely against Director Identification Numbers (DINs), and such operation of such DSCs are delegated to CA / CS, opines that an additional security layer will assist in preventing unauthorized access and will enable in immediately identifying persons who have logged in which will assist in detecting/preventing any abuse of ROC records; Pursues Section 70 of Information Technology Act, 2000 (relates to 'protected system'), states that Govt. to declare entire RoC network as 'protected system', whereby any person securing access in contravention of Section 70 will face immediate prosecution:Bombay HC
Order was passed by Justice A.K. Menon and Justice G.S. Patel.
Additional Public Prosecutors R.M. Gadhavi and P. Kantharia appeared for the Respondents.
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment