Biofarma v Paratek Pharmaceuticals Inc

In the matter of *Biofarma v Paratek Pharmaceuticals Inc*, the Federal Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the validity of a patent. Biofarma sought to revoke Australian Patent No. 677,871, held by Paratek Pharmaceuticals Inc, which claimed a novel antibiotic compound and its use. The patent was based on a priority application filed in the United States.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the patent lacked novelty and inventive step, and whether it was invalid due to insufficient disclosure. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the claimed antibiotic compound was already publicly known or obvious at the priority date, and if the patent specification adequately described the invention to enable a person skilled in the art to perform it.

Justice Nicole Worth found that the patent was invalid for lacking novelty. Her Honour reasoned that the evidence presented established that the claimed compound was disclosed in prior art publications before the priority date of the patent. Consequently, the invention as claimed was not new, and the patent could not be sustained. The Court did not need to consider the issues of inventive step or sufficiency of disclosure given this finding.