Smith & Nephew Pty Ltd v Wake Forest University Health Sciences [2009] FCAFC 142

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Smith & Nephew Pty Ltd v Wake Forest University Health Sciences [2009] FCAFC 142 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – product combination claim – whether mere collocation of integers – where integer not part of the combination of the invention is an essential integer of the claim but not as a limitation – not all essential integers fail to interact to produce functional result desired – patent invalid PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – evidence – objection not taken below to conclusory statement by expert – objection not taken as to expertise of expert – cannot object on appeal PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – interlocutory appeal – disposition on appeal Patents Act 1990 (Cth) Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57cited British Celanese Ltd v Courtaulds Ltd (1935) 52 RPC 171 cited British United Shoe Machinery Company Ltd v Fussell & Sons Ltd (1908) 25 RPC 631 distinguished Cenefill Pty Ltd v Australian Sheetpiling Pty Ltd and Others (1996) 35 IPR 64 cited Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd [2002] HCA 21; 188 ALR 280 followed Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd [2000] FCA 1689; 51 IPR 531 followed Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Pty Ltd v Avion Engineering Pty Ltd (1991) 103 ALR 239 followed Kimberly-Clark Australia Pty Ltd v Arico Trading International Pty Ltd (2001) 207 CLR 1 cited Re Klaber's Patent (1906) 23 RPC 461 cited Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Australia) Ltd (1980) 144 CLR 253 followed Palmer v Dunlop Perdriau Rubber Co Ltd (1937) 59 CLR 30 followed Pugh v Riley Cycle Co Ltd (1914) 31 RPC 266 distinguished Wake Forest University Health Sciences v Smith and Nephew Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 630 cited Bodkin, C.L. Patent Law in Australia (2008) SMITH & NEPHEW PTY LTD (ACN 000 087 507) v WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES and KCI MEDICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 056 073 468)