Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Zoetis Services LLC v Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc [2024] FCAFC 145 Appeal from: Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc v Zoetis Services LLC [2023] FCA 1119 Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc v Zoetis Services LLC (No 2) [2024] FCA 291
File number: VID 329 of 2024
Judgment of: PERRAM, NICHOLAS AND DOWNES JJ
Date of judgment: 15 November 2024
PATENTS – patents for supernatant vaccine against diseases affecting pigs Catchwords: PATENTS – validity – best method – where antigen concentrations of vaccine disclosed as a range – whether antigen concentrations material to the advantages claimed of the invention – consideration of Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd [2000] FCA 1689; 51 IPR 531 – role of good faith in best method requirement PATENTS – validity – inventive step – whether administration of vaccine in a single dose involved an inventive step – where single dose combination vaccine already commercially available at priority date – whether routine tests determine dosage
Legislation: Patents Act 1990 (Cth) s 40(2)
Apotex Pty Ltd v Les Laboratoires Servier [2013] FCA 1426 Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Heath USA Inc v Zoetis Services LLC [2020] APO 40 Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Heath USA Inc v Zoetis Services LLC [2023] FCA 1119 Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc v Zoetis Services LLC (No 2) [2024] FCA 291 C Van Der Lely NV v Ruston's Engineering Co Ltd [1993] RPC 45 Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd (1998) 43 IPR 83 Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd [2000] FCA 1689; 51 IPR 531 Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Ltd [2002] HCA 21; 76 ALJR 816 Cases cited: Generic Health Pty Ltd v Bayer Pharma Aktiengesellschaft [2014] FCAFC 73; 222 FCR 336 GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No 2) Ltd v Generic Partners Pty Ltd [2018] FCAFC 71; 264 FCR 474 Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 27; 247 FCR 61 Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Doric Products (No 2) [2007] HCA 21; 235 CLR 173 Mylan Health Pty Ltd v Sun Pharma ANZ Pty Ltd [2020] FCAFC 116; 279 FCR 354 Nichia Corporation v Arrow Electronics Australia Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 2; 175 IPR 187 Pharmacia LLC v Juno Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 167; 168 IPR 431 Sandoz AG v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2024] FCAFC 135 Sandvik Intellectual Property AB v Quarry Mining & Construction Equipment Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 138; 126 IPR 427 SARB Management Group Pty Ltd (t/as Database Consultants Australia) v Vehicle Monitoring Systems Pty Ltd [2024] FCAFC 6; 176 IPR 391
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate