Lilly Icos LLC v. Pfizer Ltd [2000] EWHC Patents 49 (08 November 2000)

Lilly Icos LLC v. Pfizer Ltd [2000] EWHC Patents 49 (08 November 2000)

Claims 10 and 11 are not limited to selective or potent cGMP PDE inhibitors, but cover any such inhibitor effective in treating erectile dysfunction by oral administration. The claims do not require the mechanism of action to be proven as cGMP PDE inhibition. The patent is not invalid for anticipation or obviousness on the evidence presented. The construction advanced by Pfizer, requiring selectivity, potency, and causation, is rejected. The claims are construed according to their plain language and the teaching of the specification.

Citation
[2000] EWHC Patents 49
Parties
Petitioner: Lilly ICOS LLC; Respondent: Pfizer Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation Petition / High Court (patents Court) Judgment
Outcome
Petition for revocation dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Obviousness, Anticipation, Claim Construction, Second Medical Use Patents
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Validity Obviousness Anticipation Claim Construction Second Medical Use Patents

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lilly ICOS LLC

Petitioner

Pfizer Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation Petition / High Court (patents Court) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether European Patent (UK) No. 0,702,555 is invalid for anticipation, obviousness, insufficiency, or added matter; Proper construction of claims 1, 10, and 11; Whether the claims require selectivity, potency, or causation in the mechanism of action; Whether prior art renders the claims obvious or anticipated.

Ratio Decidendi

Claims 10 and 11 are not limited to selective or potent cGMP PDE inhibitors, but cover any such inhibitor effective in treating erectile dysfunction by oral administration. The claims do not require the mechanism of action to be proven as cGMP PDE inhibition. The patent is not invalid for anticipation or obviousness on the evidence presented. The construction advanced by Pfizer, requiring selectivity, potency, and causation, is rejected. The claims are construed according to their plain language and the teaching of the specification.

Court Disposition

Petition for revocation dismissed

Orders

  • Patent upheld as valid
  • Petition for revocation refused