Credible Challenge to Plaintiff's Patent in a Patent Infringement Suit
In a recent legal proceeding, the court granted an interlocutory injunction in a patent infringement case involving the defendant's manufacturing and selling of Olaparib, a product covered by the plaintiff's patent. This article provides a detailed analysis of the legal principles involved and the rationale behind the court's decision.
Background:
The plaintiff, holding a valid patent for Olaparib, alleged that the defendant was infringing upon their patent by manufacturing and selling the same product under the brand name BRACANAT. The plaintiff sought an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant from continuing such activities until the final disposal of the patent infringement suit.
Validity of the Suit Patent:
The court noted that the suit patent was in its 19th year of validity and that no credible challenge to its validity had been made by the defendant. Despite the defendant's arguments, no substantial case of vulnerability to invalidity under Section 64 of the Patents Act was established. Therefore, the court found no reason to doubt the validity of the suit patent.
Granting of Interlocutory Injunction:
Based on the absence of a credible challenge to the validity of the suit patent and the defendant's clear exploitation of the patented product, the court determined that the plaintiff was entitled to an interlocutory injunction. The purpose of such an injunction is to maintain the status quo until the final resolution of the dispute. In this case, granting the injunction was necessary to prevent further infringement and protect the plaintiff's rights pending the outcome of the lawsuit.
Scope of the Injunction:
The court's order restrained the defendant from manufacturing, selling, or otherwise dealing with Olaparib, whether under the brand name BRACANAT or any other brand name, for the duration of the patent's validity and until the final disposal of the patent infringement suit. This broad scope ensures comprehensive protection of the plaintiff's rights and prevents potential circumvention of the injunction.
Case Title: Kudos Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs Natco Pharma Limited
Order Date: 01.03.2024
Case No. CS Comm 29 of 2023
Neutral Citation:2024: DHC:1716
Name of Court: Delhi High Court
Name of Hon'ble Judge: C Hari Shankar, H.J.
Disclaimer:
Ideas, thoughts, views, information, discussions and interpretation expressed herein are being shared in the public Interest. Readers' discretion is advised as these are subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception, interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman,
IP Adjutor - Patent and Trademark Attorney,
Ph No: 9990389539
