I Wei Huang / Shutterstock.com
The case reinforced the need for interim injunction applications to be made as quickly as possible, explains Lydia Birch of EIP.
In the third chapter of Neurim and Flynn’s dispute with generic companies, handed down on April 23, Mr Justice Mellor refused the claimants’ application for an interim injunction against generic giant, Teva, on the basis that Teva would not be adequately compensated by damages if its melatonin product was taken off the market.
The first claimant (Neurim) is the registered proprietor of the EP443 patent; a divisional patent for a prolonged release formulation for the use of melatonin in the manufacture of a medicament for improving the restorative quality of sleep in a patient aged 55 years or older suffering from primary insomnia characterised by non-restorative sleep.
The second claimant (Flynn) is the exclusive licensee, which markets and sells the melatonin product Circadin in the UK. EP443 will expire on August 12, 2022.
Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (LSIPR) tracks the increasing challenges for intellectual property specialists in the rapidly evolving world of life sciences. From gene patents to stem cell research, we provide the very best news and analysis.
To continue reading this article and to access 4,500+ articles, our digital magazines and special reports published for LSIPR subscribers only then you will need a subscription.
If you are already subscribed please login.
Official LSIPR subscribers include:
Allen & Overy
Arnold & Siedsma
Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch LLP (BSKB)
Carpmaels & Ransford
European Patent Office
George Washington Law School
Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
Marks & Clerk
NiKang Therapeutics Inc.
Powell Gilbert LLP
Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
World Intellectual Property Office
Injunction, patent infringement, England and wales High Court, Teva, Neurim, Flynn