Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd & Anor

The claims of the 287 and 163 Patents are invalid for insufficiency because the skilled person could not perform the invention across the full scope of the claims without undue burden or inventive skill at the priority date; none of the claims are anticipated, obvious, or add matter; Regeneron's infringement claim fails as the patents are invalid.

Parties: Claimant: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc; First Defendant: Kymab Limited; Second Defendant: Novo Nordisk A/S
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 01 February 2016
Procedural Posture: Patent Infringement and Revocation / Final Judgment
Outcome: Claims of the 287 and 163 Patents held invalid for insufficiency; Regeneron's infringement claim dismissed; Kymab's and Novo's counterclaim for revocation allowed.
Legal Topics: Patent Sufficiency, Patent Infringement, Added Matter, Inventive Step, Novelty

Intellectual Property Patent Law Patent Sufficiency Patent Infringement Added Matter Inventive Step Novelty

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5

Parties

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc

Claimant

Kymab Limited

First Defendant

Novo Nordisk A/S

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether claims 1, 5, 6 of the 287 Patent and claim 1 of the 163 Patent are infringed by Kymab's mice
2 Whether the claims are invalid for insufficiency
3 Whether the claims are anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claims of the 287 and 163 Patents held invalid for insufficiency; Regeneron's infringement claim dismissed; Kymab's and Novo's counterclaim for revocation allowed.

Orders

Regeneron's claim for infringement dismissed
287 and 163 Patents revoked for insufficiency