InternationalUSRemember you can easily switch between MIP US and MIP International at any time

India: Novartis fights on in Gleevec battle


Novartis has now appealed to the Supreme Court in a bid to overturn the rejection of its controversial patent for Gleevec. Archana Shanker of Anand and Anand discusses the issues raised by the case

The speculation seemed to have come to an end on June 26 2009 when the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) gave its decision on the Novartis patent application directed to the beta crystalline version of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec), refusing the patent application. Novartis then filed a special leave petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court, which has issued notice to the respondents in the matter (Union of India and others) to decide the issue of maintainability.

The facts of the Novartis pre-grant oppositions are well known and this article is only an attempt to summarise the issues and the propositions of law that have been discussed in the judgment.

By way of background, Novartis AG, a Swiss pharmaceutical company, applied for patent number 1602/MAS/1998 claiming Swiss priority of July 18 1997 for an invention directed to a "beta crystalline form of imatinib mesylate". Cancer Patient Aid Association (CPAA), NATCO Pharma, CIPLA...


Please log in to read the rest of this article.

New to Managing Intellectual Property? Take advantage of one week’s FREE access and become a Managing IP member today. It’s free to join and the benefits start straight away.

Already registered?

Please make sure you log in to read the rest of the article.

Log in

Join us now

Gain 7 days FREE access when you register now.

Join here

profile

Managing IP

ManagingIP

ManagingIP profile

@EIP_Elements @ReddieGrose Makes sense in principle. But patent owners might be aggrieved if they had to pay additional (renewal) fees!

Aug 3 2015 06:45 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

@ReddieGrose Also Sir Robin's discomfort with Bellure http://t.co/ZOqbCSCdve #smellalike

Aug 3 2015 05:20 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
ManagingIP profile

@ReddieGrose Yes, seems reasonable. Can think of some judges who might like to be free of CJEU precedent on eg TM exhaustion & confusion!

Aug 3 2015 04:28 ·  reply ·  retweet ·  favourite
More from the Managing IP blog


July/August 2015

The 50 most influential people in IP

Our 13th annual list of the 50 most influential people in IP is the most diverse ever. But do you agree with our selections? Join the debate online and on Twitter using the hashtag #MIP50



Most read articles

Supplements