AstraZeneca AB & Anr. v. Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited

Brief facts

AstraZeneca sued several generic makers for infringing its patents relating to dapagliflozin, relying on both an earlier genus patent and a later species patent. The Single Judge refused interim injunctions, and AstraZeneca appealed.

Issues before the Court

Whether a patentee who claims that a compound is covered and disclosed by an earlier genus patent can assert a later patent for the same compound to extend protection.

Court's findings

The Division Bench found no ground to interfere with the Single Judge's refusal of interim injunctions. Among other things, it took the prima facie view that, having applied for and agreed before the USPTO that the US equivalent of the later patent would expire on the same day as the US equivalent of the earlier genus patent, the appellants were not entitled in India to claim different periods of validity for the two patents (para 50). It also considered FMC Corporation v. Best Crop Science (7 July 2021), in which only one patent was asserted (para 51).

Decision

Appeals dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to the respondents in each suit.

Important paragraph references

Paras 51-52: conclusion and costs.

Important: This case note is a research summary only. It must be verified against the full judgment by a qualified lawyer, advocate or patent/trade mark attorney before any reliance. Do not rely on it as legal advice; Ragulika IP accepts no responsibility for its accuracy or for any action taken on it.