Posts

Showing posts with the label Arnold

The Trial- Hill v Touchlight Genetics

Image
  Author  Ciencias EspaƱolas   Licence  CC BY-SA 3.0   Source  Wikipedia Commons   Jane Lambert Patents Court (Michael Tappin KC sitting as a judge of the High Court) Hill v Touchlight Genetics Ltd and others [2025] EWHC 107 (Pat) (27 Jan 2025) I previously discussed this litigation in  Patents - Hill v Touchlight Genetics Ltd . on 11 July 2024.  I noted that it was an entitlement action, that is to say, a claim to ownership of certain patents and patent applications.   It was also an infringement claim in that the claimant alleged that the defendants had infringed the patents that she claimed. There was also a contingent counterclaim.  The action came before Michael Tappin KC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court between 25 and 28 Nov 2024 and 3 to 4 and 10 to 11 Dec 2024.   At para [331] of his judgment in  Hill v Touchlight Genetics Ltd and others   [2025] EWHC 107 (Pat), which he handed down...

Court of Appeal upholds Birss J in Unwired Planet v Huawei

Image
Jane Lambert Court of Appeal Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd   [2017] EWCA Civ 266 (12 April 2017) Lords Justices Gross and Floyd and Mr Justice Arnold  In  Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co Ltd and Others [2015] EWHC 3366 (Pat) (23 Nov 2015), Unwired Planet sued Huawei, Samsung and Google for patent infringement. The patent in suit was European patent 2,229,744 entitled Method and arrangement in a wireless communication network  which is concerned with polling for a wireless communication network. The trial judge, Mr Justice Birss, explained at para [2] of his judgment that "In this context the word "poll" refers to a message sent by a transmitter of data to the receiver to ask the receiver to tell the transmitter what information has been received. In the context of the mobile radio networks in this case, the poll asks the receiver to send a "status report". When the trans...

The Pregabalin Appeal: Generics v Warner Lambert

Image
Autho r Ac dx Source Wikipedia Creative Commons Licence Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Warner-Lambert Company LLC   [2016] EWCA Civ 1006 (13 Oct 2016) This was an appeal against two of Mr Justice Arnold's judgments. The first was his decision in  Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Warner-Lambert Company LLC   [2015] EWHC 2548 (Pat) which I discussed in  The Pregabalin Trial: Generics (UK) Ltd v Warner-Lambert Company LLC   18 Sept 2015. The second was his refusal to allow Warner-Lambert to amend certain claims of its patent after trial in    Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) v Warner-Lambert Company LLC [2015] EWHC 3370 (Pat) on the ground that the application was an abuse of the process of the court. The Issues Lord Justice Floyd, who delivered the lead judgment on the appeal, identified the issues before the Court of Appeal as follows in the first paragraph of his judgment: "Firstly, did Arnold J correctly hold certain claims of...

Designs in Ice Cream Vans: Whitby Specialist Vehicles Ltd v Yorkshire Specialist Vehicles Ltd and Others

Image
There are often a lot of cases brought by the fashion trade or toy or novelty manufacturers in the run up to Christmas. There don't seem to have been all that many this year judging by the Chancery Division cause list and the Patent Court and Intellectual Property Enterprise Court ( "IPEC" ) diaries. However, there has been a case about ice cream or rather ice cream vans. In Whitby Specialist Vehicles Ltd. v Yorkshire v Yorkshire Specialist Vehicles Ltd   [2014] EWHC 4242 (Pat) the biggest manufacturer of ice cream vans in the UK sued one of its competitors or unregistered Community design, design right and trade mark infringement. The trial took place in the Patents Court on the 10, 12-14, 20 Nov 2014 and judgment was delivered on the 17 Dec 2014. Usually actions of this kind proceed in IPEC where trials are limited to two days and costs are capped at £50,000 for the trial on liability and £25,000 for ...