HTC Europe Co Ltd v Apple Inc

HTC Europe Co Ltd v Apple Inc

HTC's devices did not infringe Apple’s 948 and 868 patents. The asserted claims of the 948 patent were invalid for obviousness over common general knowledge and for being excluded subject matter. The 022 patent was infringed by HTC’s Arc unlock mechanism but not by other mechanisms; however, all asserted claims of 022 were invalid for anticipation by Hyppönen, obviousness over Plaisant and Neonode, and not excluded subject matter. The 868 patent was not infringed and was valid over Lira. The 859 patent was invalid for obviousness over Arabic TDoc and the Hagenuk MT900, but would have been infringed if valid. None of the patents was invalid for excluded subject matter except 948 claims 1...

Parties
Claimant: HTC Europe Co. Ltd; Defendant/claimant/part 20 Defendant: Apple Inc.; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: HTC Corporation
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation Actions / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claims for infringement and validity succeeded in part and failed in part; most asserted claims were found invalid and/or not infringed.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Obviousness, Novelty, Excluded Subject Matter, Added Matter, Construction of Patent Claims
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Patent Validity Obviousness Novelty Excluded Subject Matter Added Matter +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HTC Europe Co. Ltd

Claimant

Apple Inc.

Defendant/claimant/part 20 Defendant

HTC Corporation

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation Actions / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HTC devices infringe Apple patents 948, 022, 868, and 859
  2. 2 Whether the asserted claims of the patents are valid (novelty, obviousness, excluded subject matter, added matter)
  3. 3 Proper construction of key claim terms in the patents

Ratio Decidendi

HTC's devices did not infringe Apple’s 948 and 868 patents. The asserted claims of the 948 patent were invalid for obviousness over common general knowledge and for being excluded subject matter. The 022 patent was infringed by HTC’s Arc unlock mechanism but not by other mechanisms; however, all asserted claims of 022 were invalid for anticipation by Hyppönen, obviousness over Plaisant and Neonode, and not excluded subject matter. The 868 patent was not infringed and was valid over Lira. The 859 patent was invalid for obviousness over Arabic TDoc and the Hagenuk MT900, but would have been infringed if valid. None of the patents was invalid for excluded subject matter except 948 claims 1...

Court Disposition

Claims for infringement and validity succeeded in part and failed in part; most asserted claims were found invalid and/or not infringed.

Orders

  • Declarations of non-infringement for 948 and 868 patents in respect of HTC devices
  • Declarations of invalidity for claims 1 (but not 2) of 948 patent for obviousness and excluded subject matter