Baxter Healthcare Corporation & Anor v Abbott Laboratories & Anor [2007] EWHC 348 (Pat) (02 March 2007)

Baxter Healthcare Corporation & Anor v Abbott Laboratories & Anor [2007] EWHC 348 (Pat) (02 March 2007)

The claims of the patent, properly construed, require at least 150 ppm water as a Lewis acid inhibitor to prevent degradation of sevoflurane. Baxter's product, with a water content not exceeding 130 ppm, does not infringe. The specification fails to provide a workable criterion for sufficiency in claims 2-4 unless read as coextensive with claim 5. Abbott's arguments regarding the epoxyphenolic liner and the sufficiency of the PPD were rejected. The patent is invalid for insufficiency in respect of claims 2-4 if construed more broadly.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 348 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Baxter Healthcare Corporation; Claimant: Baxter Healthcare Limited; Defendant: Abbott Laboratories; Defendant: Central Glass Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Patent Action (declaration of Non Infringement and Revocation) / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Declaration of non-infringement granted; certain claims invalid for insufficiency.
Legal Topics
Patent Construction, Non Infringement, Sufficiency of Disclosure, Prior Art, Validity
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Construction Non Infringement Sufficiency of Disclosure Prior Art Validity

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Baxter Healthcare Corporation

Claimant

Baxter Healthcare Limited

Claimant

Abbott Laboratories

Defendant

Central Glass Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Action (declaration of Non Infringement and Revocation) / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the proper construction of the claims of EP (UK) 0967975 regarding sevoflurane compositions and methods?
  2. 2 Does the product and process described by Baxter infringe the patent?
  3. 3 Is the patent invalid for insufficiency or anticipation by prior art?

Ratio Decidendi

The claims of the patent, properly construed, require at least 150 ppm water as a Lewis acid inhibitor to prevent degradation of sevoflurane. Baxter's product, with a water content not exceeding 130 ppm, does not infringe. The specification fails to provide a workable criterion for sufficiency in claims 2-4 unless read as coextensive with claim 5. Abbott's arguments regarding the epoxyphenolic liner and the sufficiency of the PPD were rejected. The patent is invalid for insufficiency in respect of claims 2-4 if construed more broadly.

Court Disposition

Declaration of non-infringement granted; certain claims invalid for insufficiency.

Orders

  • Declaration of non-infringement in respect of Baxter's described product and process.
  • Claims 2-4 of the patent held invalid for insufficiency if not limited as per the judgment.