Actavis UK Ltd & Ors v Eli Lilly & Company

Actavis UK Ltd & Ors v Eli Lilly & Company

The claims of European Patent No. 1 313 508, properly construed under UK, French, Italian, and Spanish law, are limited to pemetrexed disodium and do not extend, either literally or by equivalence, to pemetrexed diacid, dipotassium, or ditromethamine. The prosecution history confirms that the patentee deliberately limited the claims to pemetrexed disodium to secure grant. Actavis' proposed products do not infringe the Patent directly or indirectly. Actavis satisfied the procedural requirements for declarations of non-infringement under the relevant laws, and their actions were not an abuse of process. The law applicable to the grant of DNIs is English law, which was satisfied.

Parties
Claimant: Actavis UK Limited; Claimant: Actavis Group EHF (formerly Actavis Group HF); Claimant: Actavis Group PTC EHF; Claimant: Medis EHF; Claimant: Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG; Claimant: Medis Pharma GmbH; Claimant: Medis Pharma France SAS; Claimant: Actavis France SAS; Claimant: Actavis Spain S. A.; Claimant: Actavis Italy SPA a Socio Unico; Defendant: Eli Lilly & Company
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Patent Declarations of Non Infringement and Counterclaim for Infringement / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Declarations of non-infringement granted; counterclaim for infringement dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Claim Construction, Doctrine of Equivalents, Declarations of Non Infringement, Indirect Infringement, Prosecution History Estoppel, Cross Border Patent Litigation, Procedural Law Under Rome II Regulation
Intellectual Property Patents Civil Procedure Private International Law Patent Claim Construction Doctrine of Equivalents Declarations of Non Infringement Indirect Infringement +3 more

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Actavis UK Limited

Claimant

Actavis Group EHF (formerly Actavis Group HF)

Claimant

Actavis Group PTC EHF

Claimant

Medis EHF

Claimant

Actavis Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG

Claimant

Medis Pharma GmbH

Claimant

Medis Pharma France SAS

Claimant

Actavis France SAS

Claimant

Actavis Spain S. A.

Claimant

Actavis Italy SPA a Socio Unico

Claimant

Eli Lilly & Company

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Declarations of Non Infringement and Counterclaim for Infringement / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Actavis' proposed products (pemetrexed diacid, dipotassium, ditromethamine) infringe claims 1 or 12 of European Patent No. 1 313 508 in the UK, French, Italian, or Spanish designations, directly or indirectly
  2. 2 Whether Actavis is entitled to declarations of non-infringement under English law and/or the laws of France, Italy, and Spain
  3. 3 Proper construction of the patent claims under UK, French, Italian, and Spanish law, including the doctrine of equivalents

Ratio Decidendi

The claims of European Patent No. 1 313 508, properly construed under UK, French, Italian, and Spanish law, are limited to pemetrexed disodium and do not extend, either literally or by equivalence, to pemetrexed diacid, dipotassium, or ditromethamine. The prosecution history confirms that the patentee deliberately limited the claims to pemetrexed disodium to secure grant. Actavis' proposed products do not infringe the Patent directly or indirectly. Actavis satisfied the procedural requirements for declarations of non-infringement under the relevant laws, and their actions were not an abuse of process. The law applicable to the grant of DNIs is English law, which was satisfied.

Court Disposition

Declarations of non-infringement granted; counterclaim for infringement dismissed

Orders

  • Declarations that Actavis' proposed products (pemetrexed diacid, dipotassium, ditromethamine) do not infringe claims 1 or 12 of European Patent No. 1 313 508 in the UK, French, Italian, or Spanish designations, directly or indirectly.
  • Dismissal of Lilly's counterclaim for threatened infringement of the UK designation.