introduce

        The Delhi High Court said in a recent ruling:

        In the case of the plaintiff, India "1970 Annual patent act" The first 107A Article against the defendant's sale／When exporting patented products, The court must examine whether the plaintiff's concerns are justified;

        The sale of a patented product for profit does not cancel a party's reliance on No 107A Article claims the qualification of exception, As long as the product is ultimately used for research and development purposes.

        FACTS

        Merck & Co (plaintiff) Be regulated 209816 No (Hereafter called "IN 816" ) The owner of the patent, It involves the drug sitapliptin (Sitagliptin, Hereafter referred to as pharmaceuticals) The patent will be issued in 2022 years 7 Monthly maturity.

        The plaintiff seeks to target SMS Drug company (defendant) ban, He said the defendant violated him "IN 816" patent, The reasons are as follows:

        Reprinted from China Intellectual Property Network

        disclaimer: This website reprint articles are from the Internet, Does not represent the views of this website or confirm the authenticity of its content. If the source is mislabeled or the copyright of the article is involved, Please contact this website, This website will be corrected in due course, delete, thank you.