ARTICLE · 05 SEPTEMBER 2018

CJEU Issues Landmark Decision On Patent Term Extensions For Medicinal Products

McDermott Will & Emery

Explore more from McDermott Will & Emery

The UK High Court asked the CJEU what the criteria were for deciding whether a product is protected by a basic patent pursuant to Article 3(a) of Regulation No. 469/2009.

European UnionIntellectual Property

Henrik Holzapfel

Author LinkedIn connections

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered a landmark decision extending patent term extensions for certain medicinal products in litigation relating to supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) for the blockbuster anti-HIV drug TRUVAD. Teva UK Ltd., et al. v. Gilead Sciences Inc., Case No. C 121/17 (CJEU July 25, 2018) (Grand Chamber).

SPCs are special national intellectual property rights in the European Economic Area that extend the term of certain rights associated with patents granted for human or veterinary medicinal and plant protection products. An SPC does not extend the term of protection of a basic patent as such; the protection conferred by an SPC is rather limited to a certain product for which market authorization has been obtained. SPCs were introduced to compensate innovative parties for the significant time necessary to obtain such market authorizations.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Federal Circuit Holds Pleading‑Level Knowledge Triggers DTSA Statute Of Limitations

United StatesIntellectual Property

Federal Circuit Vacates Preliminary Injunction Over Claim Construction Errors And Rejects Presumption Of Irreparable Harm

United StatesIntellectual Property

A Winning Combination: Recent Decisions Signal Strengthened Protectability Of Compilation And Combination Trade Secrets

United StatesIntellectual Property

Federal Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment Of Noninfringement Based On Limiting Preambles And Denial Of JMOL Of Noninfringement For Substantial Evidence

United StatesIntellectual Property

Can An Infringer Restart Sales After Trial? Judge Gilstrap Says Not

United StatesIntellectual Property

Jeffer Mangels & Mitchell LLP

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

Comparative Guide

Franchise & Licensing

Comparative Guide

Patent Litigation

Comparative Guide

Trademark Disputes

Comparative Guide

Intellectual Property

See more popular content from

Intellectual Property

Denying Cancellation Petition, TTAB Finds That Roman Atwood's "SMILE MORE" Functions As A Mark

The Board dismissed this petition for cancellation of Roman Atwood's registration for the mark SMILE MORE for various goods (stickers, backpacks, shirts) and for retail store service featuring clothing, denying petitioner's claim that the term fails to function as a mark.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

Empowering Customers To Sell An Exonerated Accused Product

The Federal Circuit reaffirmed that the 1907 Supreme Court decision in Kessler v. Eldred is binding precedent that controls a preclusion analysis unless and until the Supreme Court overrules it.

United StatesIntellectual Property

McDermott Will & Emery

Transatlantic Top Tips: Series Of Intellectual Property Videos

Intellectual property is central to almost everything we do, as businesses or individuals. As a result, intellectual property rights are important assets to most modern businesses.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Womble Bond Dickinson

Pryor Cashman Team Recognized For Outstanding Trademark Practice

Top global brands, famous content creators, and media moguls know the best protection they can secure for their products is Pryor Cashman representation.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Pryor Cashman LLP

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC

ICANN Announces Reveal Day And Key Deadlines For 2026 New GTLD Round

On Oct. 7, 2026, at 18:00 UTC, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will publish every new generic top-level domain (gTLD) application proceeding in the 2026 new gTLD Round, including who applied...

United StatesIntellectual Property

Greenberg Traurig

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.

United StatesIntellectual Property

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Bots Need Not Apply: Copyright Office Report On Human Authorship Requirements (Video)

The U.S. Copyright Office recently released a report on the human authorship requirement for materials to qualify for copyright protection.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.

United StatesIntellectual Property