patent

The Semaglutide Verdict – You Can Make It, But You Can’t Sell It back to blog The “Weight-Loss” Patent War The “weight-loss drug” gold rush (Semaglutide) has been the biggest pharma story of the decade. Everyone wants a piece of the pie. But can generic manufacturers start making it before the patents expire? On December 17, 2025, the Delhi High Court delivered a nuanced verdict that balances innovation with access—a ruling that every generic manufacturer in ASEAN needs to study closely. The Story: The giant Novo Nordisk (creator of the blockbuster drug) sought to block Indian pharma major Sun Pharma from manufacturing a generic version of the drug. Novo argued their patent was valid until 2026 and that Sun Pharma’s production was blatant infringement. Sun Pharma argued for an “Export Exception.” They claimed they wanted to manufacture the drug in India not for local sale, but to export it to countries where Novo’s patent had already expired or never existed. In a landmark decision just days ago, the court ruled: Yes to Manufacturing, No to Selling. The judge allowed Sun Pharma to keep their factories running and to export the drug to non-patented markets, but strictly banned them from selling a single pill within India until the domestic patent expires in March 2026. The “Elongated” Lesson: This case highlights the critical “Bolar Exemption” and “Manufacturing for Export” strategies. The “Launch at Risk” Myth: Many companies think they can’t touch a patented drug until the day it expires. This ruling proves you can ramp up manufacturing and even export to “safe” markets, provided you ring-fence your domestic sales. The “Patent Cliff” Prep: With major drugs like Xarelto and Entresto also facing patent cliffs in 2025, the race is won by those who are ready to ship on Day 1. Sun Pharma’s victory allows them to be ready, rather than starting from zero in 2026. How ASEAN IPR Helps: For pharma companies in Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand, this is the blueprint. Patent Mapping: We map out exactly which ASEAN countries have valid patents for a specific drug and which are “open” for export. Bolar Exemption Strategy: We help you navigate the “Early Working” provisions in ASEAN laws, allowing you to conduct R&D and regulatory trials during the patent term so you can launch the second the patent expires. Export Clearance: We draft the legal affidavits (like the one Sun Pharma had to file) to prove to local courts that your manufacturing is strictly for export, keeping your factories running without infringing local rights. Plan Your Generic Launch Other Articles Who Owns the “Swipe”? The GUI Design Battle • December 18, 2025 • industrial design Who Owns the “Swipe”? The GUI Design Battle back to blog The “Smart Interface” War  In the physical world, an industrial design … The Billion-Dollar Bumper Case That Changed Repair Rights • December 10, 2025 • industrial design The Billion-Dollar Bumper Case That Changed Repair Rights back to blog The “Must Match” Verdict For decades, car manufacturers have held a … October 2025: The Day Adidas Lost Its Stripes in London • December 9, 2025 • trademark this is the news for trademark blog section for the October month 2025 November 2025: Can an AI Own a Brand? The Ruling That Changed Everything • December 18, 2025 • trademark Can an AI Own a Brand? The Ruling That Changed Everything back to blog The “AI-Generated” Trademark Trap Imagine you spend six …

The UPC Just Grabbed Jurisdiction Over the UK (and Beyond) back to blog The “Long-Arm” of the Law  For years, the promise of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) was simple: “One court for the EU.” It was assumed that non-EU countries like the UK or Switzerland were safe from its reach. If you infringed a patent in London, you expected to be sued in London. But in November 2025, that assumption was shattered. In a stunning “Long-Arm” ruling, the Hague Local Division confirmed that it has the power to issue injunctions covering territories outside the UPC—including the UK—if the defendant is based in the EU. The Story: The case, Fujifilm v. Kodak (and the related HL Display decision), centered on a seemingly procedural question: Can a UPC court in the Netherlands or Germany tell a company to stop selling products in England? The defendants argued that the UPC had no business ruling on a UK “national” patent validation. They claimed it was a breach of sovereignty. The judges disagreed. Relying on the “Long-Arm Jurisdiction” principle clarified by earlier European Court of Justice rulings, the UPC declared that if a defendant is domiciled in a UPC member state (like Germany or Netherlands), the court can adjudicate on their global infringements of the European patent bundle. This means a single judge in The Hague effectively issued a cross-border injunction that stopped sales in London, a non-EU city. The “Elongated” Lesson: This is a nightmare scenario for “forum shoppers.” Previously, companies would split their operations to avoid centralized litigation. They thought, “If we lose in Germany, at least we can keep selling in the UK.” The November 2025 rulings prove that strategy is dead. Global Reach: If your European HQ is in a UPC zone (like Paris or Munich), a single lawsuit can now theoretically shut down your operations in non-UPC countries like the UK, Turkey, or Switzerland. Speed vs. Sovereignty: The UPC is faster than most national courts. This means you could face a continent-wide ban in 12 months, bypassing the slower national courts you were hoping to delay in. How ASEAN IPR Helps: This “Long-Arm” risk isn’t just European; it affects any ASEAN exporter selling to the EU. Jurisdiction Analysis: We review your corporate structure. If your European distribution hub is in a UPC state, your entire global supply chain might be vulnerable to a single court order. Defensive “Torpedos”: We help you file preemptive national actions (like in the UK courts) to potentially block the UPC’s reach before a case starts. FTO (Freedom to Operate): We conduct global FTO searches that now consider this “cross-border” risk, ensuring you don’t accidentally trigger a pan-European ban from a single infringement. Assess Your Export Risk Other Articles David vs. Goliath in Pandora: Did Hollywood Steal “Avatar”? • December 18, 2025 • copyright David vs. Goliath in Pandora: Did Hollywood Steal “Avatar”? back to blog The “Avatar” Theft Accusation Imagine spending years building a universe—sketching … The Billion-Dollar Bumper Case That Changed Repair Rights • December 10, 2025 • industrial design The Billion-Dollar Bumper Case That Changed Repair Rights back to blog The “Must Match” Verdict For decades, car manufacturers have held a … November 2025: Can an AI Own a Brand? The Ruling That Changed Everything • December 18, 2025 • trademark Can an AI Own a Brand? The Ruling That Changed Everything back to blog The “AI-Generated” Trademark Trap Imagine you spend six … Who Owns the “Swipe”? The GUI Design Battle • December 18, 2025 • industrial design Who Owns the “Swipe”? The GUI Design Battle back to blog The “Smart Interface” War  In the physical world, an industrial design … October 2025: The Day Adidas Lost Its Stripes in London • December 9, 2025 • trademark this is the news for trademark blog section for the October month 2025