Mundipharma Pharmaceuticals B.V. v. Sandoz B.V. District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, 7 April 2010, Docket No. 340373 / 09-2029, including the English translation, both with thanks to Willem Hoyng, Howrey
*Now including the English translation*
In today's judgment the District Court of The Hague ruled that Mundipharma's EP 730 as granted relating to the controlled release oxycodone formulation, OxyContin®, is valid and infringed by Sandoz' 10 and 20 mg dosages. The District Court grants a provisional injunction against Sandoz while awaiting the outcome of the appeal in the pending opposition proceedings.
The judgment deals extensively with the invalidity arguments as put forward by Sandoz (added matter; (undisclosed) disclaimer; insufficient disclosure; lack of novelty; lack of inventive step).
A comment on the decision will follow shortly.
Read the judgment (in Dutch) here. Read the judgment (in English) here.
Mundipharma GmbH v. Sandoz Pharmaceuticals GmbH et al, Landgericht Düsseldorf, Germany, 30 March 2010, Case No. 4a O 13/10
In the international dispute between Mundipharma and various suppliers of generic versions of the controlled release oxycodone formulation, OxyContin®, the Landgericht Düsseldorf granted a preliminary injunction against Sandoz. The Landgericht Düsseldorf dismissed the various non-infringement arguments raised by Sandoz and considered the patent to be valid.
In coming to its decision on validity, the Landgericht extensively dealt with the invalidity-arguments raised by Sandoz and specifically referred to previous decisions of the courts in the UK and The Netherlands which had upheld parallel oxycodone patents. Interestingly, the Landgericht Düsseldorf did not follow the decision of the Bundespatentgericht which had invalidated one of Mundipharma's oxycodone-patents in view of the same prior art that was put before the Landgericht by Sandoz in the preliminary injunction proceedings.