Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1924 (17 December 2021)

Illumina Cambridge Ltd v Latvia MGI Tech SIA & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1924 (17 December 2021)

The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's finding that the Modified Nucleotide Patents were not obvious over Zavgorodny because the skilled team would not have considered Zavgorodny relevant to sequencing by synthesis, would not have been motivated to try azidomethyl as a blocking group, and would not have had a reasonable expectation of success. The patents were also entitled to priority from P2, as the priority document provided sufficient disclosure for the claimed invention. No error of law or principle was found in the judge's evaluation.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 1924
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Illumina Cambridge Limited; Defendant/appellant: Latvia MGI Tech SIA; Defendant/appellant: MGI Tech Co., Ltd; Defendant/appellant: MGI International Sales Co., Ltd; Defendant/appellant: MGI Tech Hong Kong Co., Ltd (formerly BGI Complete Genomics Hong Kong Co., Ltd)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Patent Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Appeal From High Court (patents Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Inventive Step/obviousness, Entitlement to Priority, DNA Sequencing Technology
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Validity Inventive Step/obviousness Entitlement to Priority DNA Sequencing Technology

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Illumina Cambridge Limited

Claimant/respondent

Latvia MGI Tech SIA

Defendant/appellant

MGI Tech Co., Ltd

Defendant/appellant

MGI International Sales Co., Ltd

Defendant/appellant

MGI Tech Hong Kong Co., Ltd (formerly BGI Complete Genomics Hong Kong Co., Ltd)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Modified Nucleotide Patents are obvious over Zavgorodny et al (1991)
  2. 2 Whether the Modified Nucleotide Patents are entitled to priority from P2
  3. 3 Whether the 415 Patent is obvious as a collocation of non-inventive features

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's finding that the Modified Nucleotide Patents were not obvious over Zavgorodny because the skilled team would not have considered Zavgorodny relevant to sequencing by synthesis, would not have been motivated to try azidomethyl as a blocking group, and would not have had a reasonable expectation of success. The patents were also entitled to priority from P2, as the priority document provided sufficient disclosure for the claimed invention. No error of law or principle was found in the judge's evaluation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The order of Birss J declaring the four patents valid and infringed is upheld.
  • No order for revocation of the four patents in issue.