Pharmacia LLC v Juno Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 167

Pharmacia LLC v Juno Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 167

The appeal and cross-appeal failed because the trial judge correctly construed the patent's claims to include residual water, properly applied the ordinary meaning of 'about', rejected infringement under claim 42 due to material differences, correctly exercised discretion on procedural amendments and declarations, and properly determined inventive step on a hypothetical basis as required by statute.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal From Federal Court Decision / Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Both appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['patents' 'claim Construction' 'inventive Step' 'procedural Amendment' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs']
['intellectual Property'] ['patents' 'claim Construction' 'inventive Step' 'procedural Amendment' 'declaratory Relief' 'costs']

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 and Cross Appeal From Federal Court Decision / Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether claims of patent include or exclude residual water from composition' "Proper construction of the term 'about' in claims" 'Whether omnibus claim (claim 42) was infringed' 'Procedural fairness regarding amendment of defence and withdrawal of admissions' 'Inventive step: obviousness compared to prior art' 'Entitlement to declarations and costs orders']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal and cross-appeal failed because the trial judge correctly construed the patent's claims to include residual water, properly applied the ordinary meaning of 'about', rejected infringement under claim 42 due to material differences, correctly exercised discretion on procedural amendments and declarations, and properly determined inventive step on a hypothetical basis as required by statute.

Court Disposition

Both appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed.' "The appellants pay the respondents' costs of the appeal." "The cross-appellants pay the cross-respondents' costs of the cross-appeal."]