Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS
PATENTS - infringement - application for injunction to restrain infringement - whether serious question to be tried - balance of convenience. Patents Act, 1975 Cth, s 68 BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIB COMPANY v F.H. FAULDING & CO LIMITED
VG 109 of 1995 Olney J Melbourne 23 March 1995
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) GENERAL DIVISION ) No VG 109 of 1995
B E T W E E N: BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY Applicant F.H. FAULDING & CO LIMITED Respondent
Coram: Olney J Place: Melbourne Date: 23 March 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT The applicant is the grantee of Australian Petty Patents Nos 641,894 (the first petty patent) and 651,307 (the second petty patent). The first petty patent was sealed on 30 September 1993, is currently in force and is due to expire on 29 January 1999. The second petty patent was sealed on 14 July 1994. It is currently in force and is due to expire on 13 July 1995 but, pursuant to s 68 of the Patents Act is capable of being extended for a term expiring on 15 December 1999. Each petty patent relates to an invention entitled "Methods for Administration of Taxol". The claims defining the respective inventions are: a) In the case of the first petty patent: 1. A method for administration of taxol to a patient suffering from cancer comprising infusing from 135 to 175 mgm/m2 of taxol over a duration not exceeding 6 hours. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said administration comprises infusion of 135 mg/m2 of taxol. 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the duration of said infusion is not greater than 3 hours. b) In the case of the second petty patent: 1. A method for treating cancer in a patient suffering therefrom including infusing from 135 to 175 mg/m2 of taxol over a duration less than 6 hours, wherein said method results in a reduction of haematological toxicity and neurotoxicity compared with infusing greater than 170 mg/m2 of taxol over a duration of 24 hours. 2. A method according to claim 1 wherein said method includes infusing 175 mg/m2 of taxol. 3. A method according to claim 1 or claim 2 wherein said method includes infusing said taxol over a duration not exceeding 3 hours.
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