Generics (UK) Ltd v Yeda Research and Development Co [2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat)
Generics (UK) Ltd v Yeda Research and Development Co[2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat): these patent proceedings concerned a dosage regimen for glatiramer acetate (“GA”) a treatment for Multiple Sclerosis, sold by Teva under the brand name “Copaxone”.
The Claimants sought revocation of EP (UK) No 2,949,335, which covered a thrice weekly dosage regimen of 40mg GA . As divisional patent applications were in the pipeline, they also sought a declaration that use of their 40mg GA product would have been obvious as at the priority date. Yeda, the patentee proprietor, and Teva, its exclusive licensee, counterclaimed for infringement.
One of the pieces of prior art relied upon, Pinchasi, taught use of 40mg GA in an every other day regimen. Arnold J held that the patent was invalid for obviousness over Pinchasi and, in addition, that one of its claims lacked plausibility and was therefore invalid for lack of inventive step and insufficiency. Whilst Arnold J found that the dosage regimen taught by Pinchasi was technically equivalent to that of the patent, he held that, as a matter of law, it was not possible to anticipate by equivalents. Whilst he found that use of the Claimants’ 40mg GA product in a thrice weekly regimen was obvious at the priority date, he declined to grant Arrow relief.
Mark Vanhegan QC and Kathryn Pickard appeared for the Claimants.