Abbott Biologicals BV v Novartis AG

Abbott Biologicals BV (the Opponent) filed a Notice of Intention to Defend an application for an invention, design, or artwork (IRDA) made by Novartis AG (the Holder). The dispute concerned the registrability of the IRDA. The matter was heard by Hearing Officer Nicole Worth.

The legal issues before the Hearing Officer were whether the Holder's IRDA was an invention, design, or artwork within the meaning of the relevant legislation, and whether it was registrable. The Opponent sought to rely on evidence of existing trade marks and other materials to argue against registrability.

The Hearing Officer considered evidence filed by both parties. The Opponent's evidence primarily consisted of a statutory declaration exhibiting details of its registered trade mark INFLUVAC. The Holder's evidence included details of its other trade marks, INFLUPAN and INNOFLU, for similar goods, as well as third-party trade marks containing "INFLU" or "FLU". The Holder also presented a government publication on influenza and information about a product called "Influ-Zinc". The Opponent's reply evidence included searches of the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods, which showed no results for the Holder's other trade marks but did show results for INFLUVAC in relation to influenza vaccines. This evidence also indicated that the owner of the INFLUCOL trade mark was a deregistered company and provided information about the manufacturer of "Influ-Zinc".