Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1839

Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1839

The applicant's patent claims are valid and are infringed by all relevant models of the Orifinder tools supplied by Globaltech. The claims are not restricted to methods or systems with synchronised timers and include methods that count forwards or backwards. The prior art did not anticipate the claims nor render them obvious. The applicants are not entitled to additional damages under s 122(1A) of the Patents Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Validity Proceeding / Final Judgment (liability Only)
Outcome
Applicants succeed on liability, patent claims valid, infringement found (quantum to be determined, no additional damages).
Legal Topics
['patent Infringement' 'patent Validity' 'patent Construction' 'additional Damages Under Patents Act']
['intellectual Property'] ['patent Infringement' 'patent Validity' 'patent Construction' 'additional Damages Under Patents Act']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Validity Proceeding / Final Judgment (liability Only)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Has Globaltech infringed various claims of AMC's patent?" "Are the claims in AMC's patent valid—do they lack novelty or inventive step?" 'Proper construction of patent claims (method and system claims).' 'Whether applicants are entitled to additional damages under s 122(1A) of the Patents Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's patent claims are valid and are infringed by all relevant models of the Orifinder tools supplied by Globaltech. The claims are not restricted to methods or systems with synchronised timers and include methods that count forwards or backwards. The prior art did not anticipate the claims nor render them obvious. The applicants are not entitled to additional damages under s 122(1A) of the Patents Act.

Court Disposition

Applicants succeed on liability, patent claims valid, infringement found (quantum to be determined, no additional damages).

Orders

  • ['Applicants to file and serve within 7 days draft minutes of order reflecting the conclusions set out in the reasons.']