his request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10).
The parties in this matter, “HTC” and “Apple”, embarked on litigation involving four patents owned by Apple. Following the judgment handed down in that action, Apple brought an appeal. The present judgment was concerned with only two of the patents (referred to in the judgment as the “948 patent” the “022 patent”).
The claimant (“Regen”) was the proprietor of European patent EP2073862 with claims covering a method for the preparation of blood plasma enriched in platelets and other factors (known as platelet rich plasma or PRP). PRP is plasma in which the platelet count is higher than would be found in the plasma of untreated blood. It is used by clinicians to promote the healing of wounds.
A request for a preliminary ruling made in proceedings brought by Teva UK Ltd, Accord Healthcare Ltd, Lupin Ltd, Lupin (Europe) Ltd and Generics (UK), trading as 'Mylan', against Gilead Sciences Inc. Gilead claimed that the product concerned covered by the SPC is 'protected' within the meaning of Article 3(a) of Regulation No 469/2009 by a European patent but the applicants in the main proceedings dispute that claim.
Supermac’s filed a request for revocation of European Union Trade Mark registration ‘BIG MAC’ held by McDonalds. Genuine use of a trademark exists where the mark is used in accordance with its essential function, which is to guarantee the identity of the origin of the goods or services for which it is registered, in order to create or preserve an outlet for those goods or services.
The judgment follows on a request for a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of the Specific Mechanisms laid down in Chapter 2 of Annex IV to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic.
The applicant sought to register a Trademark in the form of a colour mark. This application was brought in terms of a class 32 mineral water product in Finland. The mark Hartwell wished to use was represented by a coloured drawing in the shape of a banner.
Registration as a mark was sought for the word sign MAGELLAN. The goods and services in respect of which registration was sought were in Class 10 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, and correspond to the following description:
DOCERAM is a company manufacturing technical ceramic components. It is the proprietor of a number of registered Community designs which protect centring pins for welding in three different geometrical shapes, each of which is produced in six different types.
This judgment concerned a request for a preliminary ruling regarding the interpretation and validity of Articles 2 and 3 of, and of Annexes I A and I B to, Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC (OJ 2001 L 106, p. 1), as well as the interpretation of Article 4 of Council Directive 2002/53/EC of 13 June 2002 on the common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species (OJ 2002 L 193, p. 1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 (OJ 2003 L 268, p. 1), ('Directive 2002/53').