Posts

Showing posts with the label essentiality

Patents - Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd. and others (Technical Trial C)

Image
Author  Interdigital  Licence   CC BY-SA 4.0   Source  Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court  (Mr Justice Mellor)  Interdigital Technology Corp and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others    [ [2023] EWHC 172 (Pat) (31 Jan 2023) This was Mr Justice Mellor's judgment in Technical Trial "C".  A technical trial is a proceeding to determine whether a patent is valid, essential to a technical standard and infringed.  If it is then the owner of the patent can apply to the court for an injunction to restrain the infringement subject to an undertaking that he or she may have given to the standard-setting organization to grant any person wishing to implement the standard ("an implementer") a licence to do so on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") terms. If the patentee and implementer cannot agree those terms, there has to be a further trial (known as a "FRAND trial") in which the court will determine them. Related L...

FRAND - The InterDigital v Lenovo Litigation

Image
By Nachoman-au - A digital photograph taken by myself., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=589068   Jane Lambert Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others (Trial B) [2022] EWHC 10 (Pat) (6 Jan 2022) Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others  [2021] EWHC 3401 (Pat) (16 Dec 2021) Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others  [2021] EWHC 3192 (Pat) (26 Nov 2021) Interdigital Technology Corporation and another v Lenovo Group Ld Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 2152 (Pat) (29 July 2021) Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others  [2021] EWHC 89 (Pat) (19 Jan 2021) Mr Justice Birss (as he then was) summarized this litigation in para [1] of the transcript in  Interdigital Technology Corporation and others v Lenovo Group Ltd and others  [2021] EWHC 89 (Pat) (19 Jan 2021)...

Patents - Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and another v Archos SA and others

Image
Author  Dori   Public Domain Source  Wikimedia Commons Jane Lambert Patents Court  (Mr Justice Mellor)  Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and another v Archos SA and others   [[2021] EWHC 1639 (Pat) (16 June 2021) The first claimant is the proprietor of European patents  2,254,259 ("259") and  1,903 689 ("689") . They are part of a portfolio called the "MCP Pool!" which the claimants have promised to license on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") terms.  The defendants are manufacturers of 4G mobile phones.  The claimants argued that the defendants required their licence in order to comply with the LTE (4G) standard concerned with the transmission of a scheduling request (SR) to request uplink resources. The defendants denied that those patents were essential for compliance with the patent and pleaded that the patents were invalid for lack of novelty and an inventive step.  They also alleged that 689 was bad for ad...

Patents - Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v Oneplus Technology

Image
Xiaomi Tech Park, Beijing Author Plerxemo   Licence CC BY-SA 3,0   Source Wikimedia Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and another v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 1541 (Pat) (8 June 2021) Sometimes a procedural application can lead to a debate on fundamental principles of substantive law. Such was the case in  Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and another v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 1541 (Pat) (8 June 2021).  The application was brought by Xiaomi Cimmunications Inc. and others ("the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th defendants who are referred to in the judgment as "the Xiaomi defendants").  They applied for the claim in this action by Sisvel International SA  ("Sisvel") (the second claimant) to be dismissed and for all future claims by Sisvel against the Xiaomi defendants to be stayed. The Litigation Sisvel administers a portfolio of patents for mobile t...

FRAND - Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v Oneplus Technology

Image
Author Dori   Public Domain Source Wikimedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Mellor) Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co, Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 1048 (Pat) (26 April 2021) This was a trial to determine whether European patent (UK) 1925142B1  is essential to version 10.0.0 and all subsequent versions of TS36.322 of the 4th generation 3GPP Long-Term Evolution (“LTE’) standard.  The registered proprietor of the patent is SISVEL International S.A which is the second claimant in these proceedings.   The proceedings are part of a wider dispute as to whether the defendants should take a licence from the first claimant's patent pool ("MCP pool") on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory ("FRAND") terms.  As is often the case in FRAND disputes the defendant implementors denied the patent's validity, its essentiality to the standard and that it had been infringed.  They also disputed the fairn...