Research In Motion UK Ltd v Inpro Licensing SARL & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 51 (07 February 2007)

Research In Motion UK Ltd v Inpro Licensing SARL & Ors [2007] EWCA Civ 51 (07 February 2007)

The patent claims were found obvious over the cited prior art, particularly Mowser, Pythia, and Bartlett, as the features of using a proxy server to adapt web content for a field computer, including matching images to screen size and combining files, were either disclosed or would have been obvious to a skilled person. The trial judge made no error of principle, and the appeal failed.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 51
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Research in Motion UK Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant/appellant: Inpro Licensing S. A. R. L.; Part 20 Defendant/respondent: T-Mobile (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation and Infringement Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Appeal From High Court (patents Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Obviousness, Patent Infringement, Amendment of Patent Claims
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Validity Obviousness Patent Infringement Amendment of Patent Claims

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Research in Motion UK Limited

Claimant/respondent

Inpro Licensing S. A. R. L.

Defendant/part 20 Claimant/appellant

T-Mobile (UK) Limited

Part 20 Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation and Infringement Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Appeal From High Court (patents Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Inpro's patent EP (UK) 0 892 947 is invalid for obviousness
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments to the patent claims are allowable
  3. 3 Whether RIM's BlackBerry system infringes the patent

Ratio Decidendi

The patent claims were found obvious over the cited prior art, particularly Mowser, Pythia, and Bartlett, as the features of using a proxy server to adapt web content for a field computer, including matching images to screen size and combining files, were either disclosed or would have been obvious to a skilled person. The trial judge made no error of principle, and the appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by Inpro Licensing S. A. R. L. is dismissed.