Formycon AG & Anor v Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. & Anor [2025] EWHC 2527 (Pat)
Judgment on infringement and validity of two patents directed to the formulation of a fusion protein used to treat wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD).
The claim in issue was limited to a single formulation of the protein. The alleged infringing formulations differed in one or more respects. Regeneron asserted infringement under the doctrine of equivalence. They argued that their narrow claim should be afforded a broad scope of protection because the technical contribution of the patent was broad but this contribution could not be captured in a broad claim that was also sufficient. The Court rejected this argument, finding that the equivalence case failed on all three Actavis questions.
The prior art disclosed the fusion protein and its use for the treatment of wet AMD but no formulation information. The Court held that the narrow formulation of the claim was not obvious over that starting point. It held that one of the patents was nonetheless invalid for added matter.
Tom Alkin appeared for the Claimant instructed by Powell Gilbert LLP