Practice Area
Andrew Waugh has a general intellectual property practice embracing all IP matters including patents, copyright and designs, confidential information, passing off, trade marks and inter-related aspects of EC law. His background has led to a particular emphasis on chemical, pharmaceutical and bio-technical/genetic engineering matters as well as a broader commercial practice, including arbitrations involving a significant scientific/technical content.
Tribunals in front of which Andrew Waugh most frequently appears include not only the Courts of England and Wales, both at first instance and appellate level, but also the United Kingdom Trade Marks and Patent Office and the European Patent Office in Munich. A list of the principal cases in which Andrew Waugh has appeared both in the UK and in the European Patent Office is at the end of this resumé.

Education
Graduated in 1980 from the City University, London with a first class honours degree in Chemical and Administrative Studies which included subjects on vitamin chemistry, structure and reactivity correlations and materials science and a thesis on Pharmaceutical Research and Development.
Post-graduate Diploma in law in 1981.
Called to the Bar 1982.
Pupillage to Martin Moore-Bick 1982, 3 Essex Court (The Chambers of Kenneth Rokison QC).
Pupillage to Simon Thorley 1983, 6 Pump Court (The Chambers of William Aldous QC).

Principal Cases
Some of the technologies which he has considered in the course of contested patent litigation in the High Court (and the Court of Appeal and House of Lords) include:
• semi-conductor devices (General Instrument v. Intel)
• recombinant human growth hormone and insulin (Eli Lilly v. Genentech)
• microporous nylon membranes (Pall v. Commercial Hydraulics)
• cardiac catheters (Bonzel v. Intervention)
• thermoformed laminates (Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing v. Rennicks)
• compact discs (Optical Recording Corp. v. Hayden Labs)
• recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (Biogen v. Medeva)
• flight simulators (Rediffusion Simulation v. Singer Link Miles)
• recombinant erythropoietin (Amgen v. Boehringer Mannheim)
• zantac (Glaxo v. Generics)
• ondansetron/granisitron (Glaxo v. SmithKline Beecham)
• terfenadine metabolites (Merrell Dow v. Norton)
• augmentin (SmithKline Beecham v. Norton)
• contact lenses (Optical Sciences v. Aspect Vision Care)
• acetic acid purification (Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. BP Chemicals)
• polyethylene production (Union Carbide Corp. v. BP Chemicals)
• endoluminal stents (Boston Scientific v. Palmaz)
• pertussis vaccines (pertactin) (Chiron v. Evans and SmithKline Beecham v. Connaught Laboratories)
• paclitaxel (chemotherapy) (Bristol Myers Squibb v. Napro)
• Acesulphame-K (artificial sweetners) (Nutrinova v. Scanchem)
• method for making recombinant erythropoietin (EPO) - (Amgen v TKT)
• cGMP PDE inhibitors (Viagra) (Lilly ICOS v. Pfizer)
• paroxetine (SmithKline Beecham v Apotex)
• salmeterol and fluticasone (GlaxoSmithKline v Cipla)
• Clarithromycin (Abbott v Ranbaxy)
• paroxetine mesylate (Synton v SKB)
• Atorvostatin (Ranbaxy v Warner Lambert)
• escitalopram (GUK v Lundbeck)
• drug eluting stent (Conor v Angiotech)
• Lanzoprazole (Takeda v Sandoz)
• Oxaliplatin (Mayne v Sanofi)

Principal EPO Cases
Cases in which Andrew Waugh has appeared up to and including Oral Proceedings before the EPO include:
• EP 37,255 - Eli Lilly (Opponent - Hoechst) Subject matter: Process for the recombination of the A & B chains of insulin. Represented patentee on appeal to Appeal Board.
• EP 63,491 - Eli Lilly (Opponent - SmithKline Beecham) Subject matter: Treatment of cattle with antibiotics to improve milk production. Main claims maintained on opposition. On appeal to Appeal Board, case remitted to opposition division for consideration of narrower claims. (On appeal from remission to the Appeal Board, see below)
• EP 203,945 - Bonzel (Opponent: Advanced Cardiovascular Systems) Subject matter: Catheters for Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty. Represented Opponent on opposition before Opposition Division. No appeal.
• EP 68,763 - Board of Regents of the University of Texas (Opponent: Hybritech Inc) Subject matter: Bispecific antibodies. Represented Opponent on appeal to Appeal Board.
• EP 235,691 - Hoechst (Opponent - Eli Lilly) Mixing ball for insulin suspensions. Represented opponent before Opposition Division.
• EP 177,478 - Monsanto (Opponent - Eli Lilly) BST process. Represented opponent before Opposition Division. Result - patent maintained as granted.
• EP 192,629 - Monsanto (Opponent - Eli Lilly) BST formulations. Represented opponent before Opposition Division.
• EP 202,780 - Allied Colloids (Intervenor - American Cyanamid). Flocculating agents. Represented Intervenor before the Enlarged Board of Appeal.
• EP 237,545 - Kirin-Amgen (Opponents: ICI, Kyowa Hakko, Boehringer Mannheim). Subject matter: recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). Represented patentee before Opposition Division.
• EP 182,442 - Biogen, Inc. (Opponents: Murex, Institut Pasteur, Immuno, Hexal-Biotech). Subject matter: recombinant hepatitis B viral antigens. Represented patentee before Appeal Board (the patent having been revoked by the Opposition Board)
• EP 148,605 - Amgen, Inc. (Opponents: Elanex, Behringwerke, Boerhringer-Mannheim, Immuno) Subject matter: recombinant erythropoietin. Represented patentee before Appeal Board (the patent having been maintained after Opposition).
• EP 63,491 Eli - Lilly (Opponents: SmithKline Beecham and Pfizer Ltd). Subject matter: Treatment of cattle with antibiotics to improve milk production. Represented the Patentee before the Appeal Board on appeal from Opposition Division refusing narrower claims (on remission from Appeal Board (see above).
• EP 209,539 - Genetics Institute, Inc (Opponents: Cilag GmbH, Kirin-Amgen, Inc) subject matter: "Homogeneous Erythropoietin". Represented Opponent before the Appeal Board on appeal from Opposition Division which had rejected the opposition.
• EP 449,958 - Praxis Biologics Inc. (Opposition by Pasteur Merieux Connaught) Subject matter: Mennigococcal Outer Membrane Proteins. Represented Opponent before Opposition Division
• EP 375,724 - New York University (Opposition by Incyte Corp). Subject matter: Bacteriocidal Permeability Increasing proteins (BPI). Represented Patentee before Opposition Division.
• EP 237,545 - Kirin&-Amgen (Opponents: ICI, Kyowa Hakko, Boehringer Mannheim). Subject matter: recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). Represented patentee before Appeal Board.
• EP 526,339 - CIBA Speciality Chemical Holdings Inc (Opponents: Cytec Industries Inc.) Subject matter: Fluoropolymer Coatings. Represented Opponent before the Opposition Division.
• EP 382,526 - BIOCHEM Pharma (Opponents: Emory University) Subject matter - 3TC - Acted for Opponents before the Opposite Division
• EP 516,885 - CYTEC Technology Group (Opponents: BK Guilini, Dow Chemical) - Subject matter Sizing Agents - Acted for Patentee before Opposition Division.
• EP 383,569 - PAFRA Ltd (assigned to INHALE CORP) - (Opponents: Boehringer Mannheim GmbH, Novo, Quadrant Technology, Akzo) - Subject matter - storage stabilisation of labile materials using glasses - Acted for Patentee before the Opposition Division.
• EP 702,555 - Pfizer Ltd. - (Opponents Lilly Corp, ICOS Corp and ors) - Subject matter - PDEV inhibitors for the treatment of impotence - Acted for the Opponents before the OD and Appeal Board.
• EP 888,093 - Divysio Solutions - (Opponents - Guidant Corp) - Subject matter - Expandable stent - Acted for the Opponent before the Opposition Division.
• EPA 96915698.3 – Genentech – subject matter – use of IGF-1 to sustain biological response – Acted for Applicant before Appeal Board.
• EP 623,354 – Medtronic Inc. – Opposition by Guidant Corp. Subject matter – intravascular stents – acted of the opponent before Opposition Division.
• EP 620,720 – Wake Forest Univ. – Opposition by Mondomed NV – Subject matter – medical device – acted for patentee before appeal board.