In opposition proceedings number IL 172563, concerning a Merck patent application for “Phosphoric Acid Salt of a Dipeptidal Petidase-IV Inhibitor” Teva requested permission to submit an Opinion by a medical expert concerning experimental evidence conducted under his supervision. The opinion was relevant, but the correct time for submission thereof was together with other evidence.
The regulations for patent opposition proceedings in Israel and the general civil law proceedings require all evidence to produced at the proper time. Substantive issues generally take precedence over these formalistic requirements. Since Teva didn’t have the material at the proper time since the experiments had not been performed, there was no issue of bad faith in the late submission, which was not a delaying tactic since the evidence simply was not then available. However, this late-filed experimental evidence was crucial in determining whether Merck deserved a patent or not, and the scope thereof. Consequently, the Deputy Commissioner of Patents ruled that late submission of the evidence was allowable, but awarded costs of NIS 5000 to Merck as a form of punishment to Teva for deviating from the correct procedure.
We now await the main ruling.
The case: Opposition re IL 172563 to Merck.
[...] Late submission of evidence allowed in opposition proceeding concerning an Israel patent to Merck (IP Factor) [...]