We have advised a fast growing Ducth biotech company in a complex patent and know-how license deal, with regard to proprietary monoclonal antibodies, with one of the largest international pharmaceutical companies worldwide (2014). We have assisted our client in preparing the deal terms, inter alia with the selection and presentation of information, provided an opinion on the validity of patents of third parties and negotiated the contract.
Patents & IP
In this case, for a national Dutch scientific institute, we terminated old technology transfer and patent license agreements in the field of DNA technology, that they had concluded with a Ducth start-up company. We formulated new agreements in a clearer, more transparent way, overseeing the negotiation process.
For our client, we negotiated a number of major licence contracts with Asian licensees in the field of vaccine research and development, focusing in particular on product liability, general liability and the enforceability of royalty payments.
We successfully represented the patent holder in proceedings against a patent infringement of a patent for the recycling of asphalt with a distillation residue of cashew nut shell liquid (ruling of 5 September 2014)
Ranbaxy had requested a ruling on Esomeprazol. The court had dismissed the claims. On appeal, Astra Zeneca gave the requested declaration that it will not enforce its patent rights.
Advising on the scope of protection and validity of supplementary protection certificates for combination products (2013). We advised a client on the validity of a supplementary protection certificate in light of recent developments and relevant rulings of the European Court of Justice.
Attachment had been levied on one of our client's sales records for certain branded and other products (pursuant to Article 843a Netherlands Code of Civil Procedure). This information was intended to serve as evidence regarding a claim for the revocation of our client's trademark right. However, in order for attachment to be valid, a "claim in the main action" must be instituted sufficiently early for the court hearing the main action to assess the claim. No such claim had, however, been instituted in the main action, concerning a claim for access to the records.
This case had been ongoing since late 2007. LEO Pharma had a patent for crystalline calcipotriol monohydrate. A central issue in this case was the application of the Problem Solution Approach as applied by the European Patent Office. The district court had considered the patent valid and had allowed LEO Pharma's infringement claims. The The Hague Court of Appeal quashed the district court's ruling and dismissed the claims.