You will find here a selection of decisions of the French Courts, of the European patent Office (EPO) and of the European Union Intellectual property Office(EUIPO). Various teams of CASALONGA were involved in some of the cases handled. Other cases are quoted here in view of their particular importance.

Paris Court of Appeal - SAS SANTEN v/ INPI


Second medical indication and SPC - Referral to the CJEU - Gérard Dossmann, French IP and European patent attorney comments the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal of 9 october 2018 referring questions to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Article 3d) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009 in the light of the NEURIM judgment (CJEU C-130/11).

Background The subject of the SANTEN’s patent: The use of a submicron oil-in-water ophthalmic emulsion comprising an immunosuppressive agent selected from the group (...)

Paris Court of Appeal - CAR&BOAT MEDIA v/ SNEEP


The Company CAR&BOAT MEDIA was represented by Arnaud CASALONGA, attorney, and by Audrey DANEL, attorney.


  • - Use of the term “ARGUS” on a website to designate a service of vehicle sale rating
  • - Infringement action against ARGUS trademarks with request of provisional prohibition in a preliminary injunction
  • - Provisional prohibition rejected at first instance and on appeal
The Court of appeal of Paris confirms the first instance decision of February 22, 2018 rejecting requests of provisional prohibition made by the Company SNEEP on the basis of (...)

Grand Chamber of the CJEU - TEVA and others v/ GILEAD SCIENCES INC.


Gérard Dossmann, French and European Patent Attorney comments the judgment of 25 July 2018 of the Grand Chamber of the COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (CJEU). The Chamber rules on the interpretation of article 3a) of Regulation (EC) No. 469/2009 applying a two stages criterion.

Background: The company GILEAD markets under the name TRUVADA®, an antiretroviral drug indicated for the treatment of HIV patients. This medicine contains two active (...)

EUIPO – Opposition Division - Gap Inc. c/ STMicroelectronics International N.V.


STMicroelectronics International N.V. was represented by Caroline Casalonga, Attorney- and Philippine Charles, Legal Counsel.


  • - Failure to use GAP’s marks for electronic components;
  • - No similarity between electronic components and mobile applications for online sales
"MIND THE GAP" In a decision rendered on 31 May 2018, the EUIPO’s Opposition Division rejected the opposition filed against the EU trade mark application gapDRIVE No. (...)

Paris Court of Appeal - BIOGARAN v/ MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP. and al


BIOGARAN was represented by Arnaud Casalonga, Attorney at Law, Marianne Gabriel, Attorney at Law, assisted by Gérard Dossmann, French and European Patent Attorney.


  • - Implementation of articles 3 c) and 3 d) of Regulation (EC) 469/2009
  • - Is it possible to obtain the grant of 2 SPCs on the same basic patent covering (1) the active innovative ingredient alone and (2) the combination with another known active ingredient
  • - Preliminary Injunction dismissed in first instance and appeal
By decision dated June 26, 2018, and on the basis of Articles 3 (c) and 3 (d) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009, the Paris Court of Appeal uphold the interim order issued on (...)

Paris Court of Appeal - Conseil des Grands Crus Classés 1855 and CAVB v/ Caudalie


2018: A “Grand Cru” for Caudalie cosmetics?

Following the litigation between Caudalie and the Council of Grands Crus Classés 1855, the Confederation of Appellations and Winegrowers of Burgundy and the Council of Wines of Saint Emilion: Can the traditional wine terms "Grand Cru" and "Premier Cru" be registered as trademarks for products other than wine, namely cosmetics?

In its judgment dated May 29, 2018, the Paris Court of Appeal replies in the affirmative by applying in all points the specialty principle of the traditional terms.

As a reminder, the company Caudalie has registered the French trademarks "Premier Cru" and "SOIN PREMIER GRAND CRU" for cosmetics and especially beauty creams. The 3 wine (...)

Paris 1st Instance Court - BIOGARAN v/ GILEAD et al


BIOGARAN was represented by Arnaud Casalonga, Attorney at Law, Marianne Gabriel, Attorney at Law, assisted by Gérard Dossmann, French and European Patent Attorney.


  • - Interpretation of article 3a) of the Regulation No. 469/2009 on SPC - What is the meaning of "protected by a basic patent"?
  • - SPC cancelled.
By judgment of May 25th, 2018, the Paris Court of First Instance invalidated the SPC on the combination of "tenofovir disoproxil and its salts, hydrates, tautomers and (...)