1. Several blogs have recently posted pieces on the amendments to the German Patent Act, which I have previously noted here and here. There appears to be widespread agreement that, as far as the provision relating to injunctive relief is concerned, there isn't going to be any real change to current practice (except, maybe, patent litigation will be marginally more expensive for a while as litigants test the waters). This is pretty disappointing, in my view. Anyway, here are some recent commentaries: (1) Mike Gruber, Changes to the German Patent Act, Kluwer Patent Blog, June 22, 2021; (2) Mathieu Klos, German patent judges predict few changes to automatic injunction, JUVE Patent, June 23, 2021; (3) Tilman Müller-Stoy & Daniel Seitz, Germany: The German Parliament Adopts Government Bill For A Second Act Concerning The Simplification And Modernization Of German Patent Law, Bardehle Pangenberg, June 30, 2021; and (4) several posts by Florian Mueller (see, e.g., here, here, and here).
2. On EPLaw, Luis Fernández-Novoa published a post titled ES-Edwards LifeSciences v. Meril, with a link to a longer article and to the judgment (in Spanish). The post and article discuss a recent case in which the Barcelona Paten Court denied a motion for a preliminary injunction, on the ground that the patentee waited too long (11 months) to request preliminary relief, thus suggesting a lack of urgency, and hadn't shown irreparable harm.
3. On IP Watchdog, Michael Cicero published an article titled Piercing Halo's Haze at Year Five: Smoke Clearing on Enhanced Damages. The article states that, since Halo, there have been 13-15 judgments annually for enhanced patent damages in the U.S., and discusses some recurring topics of interest including the evolving case law on the meaning of "willful," the relevance of opinions of counsel, and "whether post-suit knowledge counts toward willfulness." Also on IP Watchdog, Gene Quinn published a piece titled Mega Awards Likely to Highlight Unpredictability of U.S. Patent Damages Law.