Medrad Inc v Alpine Medical Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 949

Medrad Inc v Alpine Medical Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 949

The applicants established a serious question to be tried on infringement: the respondent admitted the Klikfit substitute syringes had the asserted integers, and it was reasonably arguable that the Stellant substitute syringes had an engaging portion comprising a groove or, alternatively under claims 4 and 12, a ridge, and that their hub inner surface was complementary in shape to the plunger. The respondent did not make out a prima facie obviousness case because its evidence did not sufficiently show that the invention would have been obvious to a person skilled in the relevant art in light of common general knowledge in Australia before the priority date. Damages would not be adequate,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement Proceeding and Application for Interlocutory Injunction; Application for Leave to Further Amend Statement of Claim and Application / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Interlocutory relief granted; leave to further amend granted; trial fixed and directions made for minutes of orders and submissions on costs.
Legal Topics
['medical Injector Systems' 'alleged Patent Infringement' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'patent Validity' 'obviousness' 'construction of Claims' 'leave to Amend']
['patents' 'practice and Procedure'] ['medical Injector Systems' 'alleged Patent Infringement' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'patent Validity' 'obviousness' 'construction of Claims' 'leave to Amend']

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

Patent Infringement Proceeding and Application for Interlocutory Injunction; Application for Leave to Further Amend Statement of Claim and Application / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was a serious question to be tried as to infringement of Australian Patent No 2005200597 by the respondent's syringes." 'Whether the respondent had shown a triable case that the asserted patent claims were invalid for obviousness.' 'Whether damages would be an adequate remedy and whether the balance of convenience favoured interlocutory injunctive relief.' 'Whether the applicants should have leave to further amend their statement of claim and application to rely on claims 4 and 12 of the patent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants established a serious question to be tried on infringement: the respondent admitted the Klikfit substitute syringes had the asserted integers, and it was reasonably arguable that the Stellant substitute syringes had an engaging portion comprising a groove or, alternatively under claims 4 and 12, a ridge, and that their hub inner surface was complementary in shape to the plunger. The respondent did not make out a prima facie obviousness case because its evidence did not sufficiently show that the invention would have been obvious to a person skilled in the relevant art in light of common general knowledge in Australia before the priority date. Damages would not be adequate,...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory relief granted; leave to further amend granted; trial fixed and directions made for minutes of orders and submissions on costs.

Orders

  • ['A trial in the proceeding be fixed for 10.15 am on 22 February 2010, with an estimated duration of 4 days.' 'On or before 4 pm on 27 August 2009: (a) the applicants file and serve short minutes of orders in conformity with these reasons; and (b) the parties file and serve short submissions on costs.']