||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 248 (Nov)
|| EWHC 2532 (CH)
||Chancery Division, Patents Court
Christopher Floyd QC sitting as a deputy judge of the high court
||Simon Thorley QC and Richard Meade (instructed by Bird & Bird) for the claimant.
||Richard Arnold QC and Thomas Mitcheson (instructed by Simmons & Simmons) for the defendant.
||18 November 2005
Patent - Petition for revocation - Insufficiency - Whether claim obvious - Whether burden of proof shifting to patentee where application made to amend claim - Whether claim sufficient.
In an application for revocation of the defendant's patent concerning veterinary medicine, two of the claims were found to be invalid for insufficiency.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary