Dentons in failed appeal over Dutch patent infringement ruling

Dentons announced that it had appealed in the case against two patents that were allegedly infringed by the Hague District Court in 2006, and that the Court of Appeal upheld the decision to have infringed the two patents, which was scheduled for 13 MayDentons said in a statement on April 12 that the company had appealed to the Court of Appeal of The Hague in the case of two patents against Ajinomoto CoIncand Ajinomoto Eurolysine S.AS.S(plaintiff) in L-Lysine products, which were alleged in 2006 and were awarded pending further hearings on legal costsboard of trustees believes that the decision of the Hague Court of Appeal will not affect the company's sales, finances and prospectsThe Board also considered that there was reason to appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision and was seeking legal advicethe plaintiff in mid-2006 alleged that the company had filed a sale, import and sale of its L-lysine products in the Netherlands and infringing three european patents of the Dutch partThe following year, the Hague Regional Court ruled that the company had infringed two of the patents, but did not violate trade secrets as the plaintiff referred to, and that a suspected claim of one patent would be suspended pending a decision by the European Patent Office against the registration proceedingsDentons announced that it had appealed in the case against two patents that were allegedly infringed by the Hague District Court in 2006 and that the Court of Appeal upheld the decision to have infringed the two patents, which was scheduled for 13 MayDentons said in a statement on April 12 that the company had appealed to the Court of Appeal of The Hague in the case of two patents against Ajinomoto CoIncand Ajinomoto Eurolysine S.AS.S(plaintiff) in L-Lysine products, which were alleged in 2006 and were awarded pending further hearings on legal costsboard of trustees believes that the decision of the Hague Court of Appeal will not affect the company's sales, finances and prospects The Board also considered that there was reason to appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision and was seeking legal advice the plaintiff in mid-2006 alleged that the company had filed a sale, import and sale of its L-lysine products in the Netherlands and infringing three european patents of the Dutch part The following year, the Hague Regional Court ruled that the company had infringed two of the patents, but did not violate trade secrets as the plaintiff referred to, and that a suspected claim of one patent would be suspended pending a decision by the European Patent Office against the registration proceedings (Name)