Merck’s silence irrelevant as Sigma left gaspingMerck Canada Inc. holds a UK patent and a
UK SPC covering the active ingredient in the
asthma treatment Singulair. It started an action
for infringement of these rights by Sigma
Pharmaceuticals PLC, which was importing
SPECIFIC MECHANISM
other states, e.g. Bulgaria and Romania. “With regard to the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia or Slovakia, the holder, or his beneficiary, of a patent or supplementary protection certificate
state, the rights holder can prevent the
for a pharmaceutical product filed such protection could not be obtained Member States for that product, may rely on the rights granted by that patent or supplementary protection certificate in order to prevent the import and marketing of that product in the Member State or States where
safety and efficacy. The authority grants
the product in question enjoys patent
a parallel import licence which allows the
It is typically undertaken to exploit price
protection or supplementary protection, importer to take advantage of an existing
even if the product was put on the market in that new Member State for the first time by him or with his consent. and effective), and thus allows marketing
Any person intending to import or covered by the above paragraph in a Member State where the product enjoys under the specific mechanism, the party
patent or supplementary protection shall demonstrate to the competent
product is additionally required to inform
authorities in the application regarding
the regulatory authority that it has given
that import that one month’s prior
one month’s notification to the rights
into the accession treaty of these states:
notification has been given to the holder holder in the country of import.
or beneficiary of such protection.”
Case backgroundSigma said that it notified Merck of
its intention to import Polish Singulair
into the UK, as required by the specific
The parties’ argumentsSigma argued that it was not liable for
damages in relation to its activities prior
Sigma that the judge’s interpretation of
the specific mechanism created a burden For more information, please contact:
the patent position might be for a given
Carpmaels & Ransford is a leading firm
publically available registers, or at least
correct Sigma company in the June 2009 their behalf, to determine the position.
letter. Merck also argued that its silence
reference to notice by the rights holder
Carpmaels & Ransford is regulated by
reference is to notice by the importer to This Briefing Note was first published in the
regulatory authority that notice has been importer’s notification under the specific IAM IP Newsletter.
mechanism. In the present case, Merck’s
silence did not imply consent, and Sigma
Merck’s rights and Merck was entitled to
Merck’s silence irrelevant as Sigma left gasping
Copyright Carpmaels & Ransford 2012
Case 3:13-cv-03715-MAS-DEA Document 87 Filed 01/13/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 33251 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY VICINAGE MEMORANDUM ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon 7-Eleven, Inc.’s (“7-Eleven”) pre-motion letter seeking leave to file a motion to Case 3:13-cv-03715-MAS-DEA Document 87 Filed 01/13/14 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 33252