TOP-10 IP Disputes 2021

14 February 2022

CATEGORY: Patents

CASE: GEROPHARM VS. NOVO NORDISK A/S

DETAILS: Resolution of the Presidium of the Intellectual Property Court dated October 18, 2021 in case No. SIP-461/2020

DESCRIPTION: Extension of a patent may be challenged at the Intellectual Property Court by means of action-based proceedings.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Patents

CASE: PSK PHARMA VS. EURASIAN PATENT OFFICE

DETAILS: Resolution of the Intellectual Property Court dated November 22, 2021 in case No. SIP-1030/2020

DESCRIPTION: Extension of a Eurasian patent may be challenged at the domestic level before the Intellectual Property Court.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Patents

CASE: NOVARTIS VS. MAMONT PHARM

DETAILS: Resolution of the Intellectual Property Court dated February 20, 2021 in case No. A40-174438/2020

DESCRIPTION: Interim relief enjoining the defendant from executing state contracts is justified, if in another case a patent infringement has been found and an injunction has been imposed on marketing a generic drug.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Trademarks

CASE: MELNITSA ANIMATION STUDIO VS. IE PANINA

DETAILS: Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 46-P dated October 28, 2021

DESCRIPTION: If the court reduces the compensation for a trademark infringement, the defendant may not recover legal expenses from the plaintiff.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Trademarks

CASE: FROG COMPANY VS. ROSPATENT

DETAILS: Resolution of the Presidium of the Intellectual Property Court dated July 30, 2021 in case No. SIP-577/2020

DESCRIPTION: Rospatent’s competence at the stage of expert assessment of a trademark submitted for registration is limited to protecting public interests. In particular, Rospatent may not rely on a conflict with another party’s work or character.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Trademarks

CASE: IE IBATULLIN VS. MURAVEY +

DETAILS: Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 26, 2021 in case No. A50-908/2020

DESCRIPTION: Accumulating trademarks is an abuse of rights. That a trademark is not used may signify that there is no confusion in the eyes of the consumer.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Unfair competition

CASE: TROKAS PHARMA VS. FAS DIRECTORATE FOR THE MOSCOW REGION

DETAILS: Resolution of the Intellectual Property Court dated September 7, 2021 in case No. A40-2379/2021

DESCRIPTION: A cease-and-desist order for a patent infringement may be made in an unfair competition case at the FAS Russia.

_______________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Unfair competition

CASE: CAPRICE VOSTOK VS. BADEN

DETAILS: Ruling of the Intellectual Property Court dated August 4, 2021 in case No. A40-325894/2019

DESCRIPTION: The district commercial court, rather than the Intellectual Property Court, is competent to hear cases on trade dress infringements as a cassation court.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Copyright and related rights

CASE: TELESPORT VS. YANDEX

DETAILS: Ruling of the First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction dated June 2, 2021 in case No. 3-7/2021

DESCRIPTION: This is the first case that deals with the iFrame technology. The search engine that uses the iFrame technology is an information intermediary, which significantly reduces its liability.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Copyright and related rights

CASE: PRACTICUM GROUP VS. UNICRAFT

DETAILS: Resolution of the Intellectual Property Court dated April 19, 2021 in case No. A40-18422/2019

DESCRIPTION: The use of an open-source code does not constitute a breach of the software design and implementation services agreement.

_____________________________________________________________________________

CATEGORY: Bonus

ДЕЛО: VALENTA PHARM VS. IE AKHAPKINA

DETAILS: Decision of the Intellectual Property Court dated July 21, 2021 in case No. SIP-795/2020

DESCRIPTION: COVID restrictions cannot be accepted as a valid reason for not using the trademark.