A Patents Court had originally considered the infringement of Amgen's patent by a number of parties, including Roche and TKT, as well as a claim for infringement of Roche's patent by Amgen. The court ruled that Amgen's patent was partially valid, that there had been infringement by Roche and TKT, and that Roche's patent was invalid. TKT filed an appeal; the Court of Appeal reversed these decisions on invalidity and infringement, and ruled that the claims of the Amgen patent were valid. However, the Court of Appeal ruled that although they had a wide scope of protection, Amgen's patent was not infringed by TKT because the patent did not cover TKT's endogenous gene-activation technology. Amgen then appealed to the House of Lords.

The UK decision is in contrast to the US decision, in which the District Court of Massachusetts ruled in Amgen's favour on its EPO patents. TKT, with partner Aventis Pharma, intends to appeal. However, the two cases cannot be compared directly, because the claims in the patents are different.

Enjoying our latest content?
Log in or create an account to continue

  • Access the most recent journalism from Nature's award-winning team
  • Explore the latest features & opinion covering groundbreaking research
Access through your institution

or

Sign in or create an account
Continue with Google
Continue with ORCiD