Abbott Laboratories v Corbridge Group Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 314

Abbott Laboratories v Corbridge Group Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 314

Claim 1 of Australian Patent Number 572138 encompasses both invasive and external sensors and is not limited to invasive devices. The Excel Product infringes Claim 1 as its electrodes are sufficiently close, of small dimension, and meet the manipulation requirements described. Claims 17, 18, and 19 are invalid for lack of clarity due to nonsensical reference to Claim 1. Other grounds for revocation of Claim 1 and dependent claims fail, as the claims are sufficiently described, fairly based, novel, inventive, and represent a manner of manufacture. Prior claiming does not apply under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Appeal
Outcome
Appeal by Abbott upheld; appeal by Corbridge and Inverness upheld in part
Legal Topics
['patent Infringement' 'patent Validity' 'construction of Patent Claims']
['intellectual Property' 'patents'] ['patent Infringement' 'patent Validity' 'construction of Patent Claims']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the claims of Australian Patent Number 572138 are valid under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth)' "Proper construction and scope of 'comprising' and 'or' in the patent claims" 'Whether external (non-invasive) devices infringe Claim 1' 'Grounds for revocation of certain claims' 'Fair basing, sufficiency, novelty, obviousness, manner of manufacture, and prior claiming under Australian patent law']

Ratio Decidendi

Claim 1 of Australian Patent Number 572138 encompasses both invasive and external sensors and is not limited to invasive devices. The Excel Product infringes Claim 1 as its electrodes are sufficiently close, of small dimension, and meet the manipulation requirements described. Claims 17, 18, and 19 are invalid for lack of clarity due to nonsensical reference to Claim 1. Other grounds for revocation of Claim 1 and dependent claims fail, as the claims are sufficiently described, fairly based, novel, inventive, and represent a manner of manufacture. Prior claiming does not apply under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth).

Court Disposition

Appeal by Abbott upheld; appeal by Corbridge and Inverness upheld in part

Orders

  • ['Orders of Gyles J made on 24 November 2000 set aside' 'Respondents (Corbridge and Inverness) restrained from infringing Australian Patent Number 572138 by importing and supplying the Excel ET Blood Glucose Test Strip' "Respondents to pay applicants' costs" 'Declared that claims 4, 5, 6, 17, 18, and 19 of...