Research In Motion UK Ltd. v Inpro Licensing SARL

Research In Motion UK Ltd. v Inpro Licensing SARL

All claims of the patent are invalid for anticipation or obviousness in light of cited prior art (GloMop, Pythia, Mowser, Bartlett). Amendments in the A series are disallowed for lack of clarity and added matter; B series amendments would be allowed but claims remain invalid. The patent does not relate to excluded subject matter and is capable of industrial application. Relevant claims would have been infringed had they been valid.

Parties
Claimant/first Part 20 Defendant: Research In Motion UK Limited; Second Part 20 Defendant: T-Mobile (UK) Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Inpro Licensing SARL
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation and Infringement / Final Judgment
Outcome
Action for revocation succeeds; counterclaim for infringement dismissed.
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Patent Infringement, Obviousness, Anticipation, Excluded Subject Matter, Industrial Applicability
Intellectual Property Patent Law Patent Validity Patent Infringement Obviousness Anticipation Excluded Subject Matter Industrial Applicability

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 7 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Research In Motion UK Limited

Claimant/first Part 20 Defendant

T-Mobile (UK) Limited

Second Part 20 Defendant

Inpro Licensing SARL

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation and Infringement / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the patent EP (UK) 0 892 947 is valid or invalid for anticipation or obviousness
  2. 2 Whether the patent is infringed by the BlackBerry system
  3. 3 Whether amendments to the patent claims are allowable

Ratio Decidendi

All claims of the patent are invalid for anticipation or obviousness in light of cited prior art (GloMop, Pythia, Mowser, Bartlett). Amendments in the A series are disallowed for lack of clarity and added matter; B series amendments would be allowed but claims remain invalid. The patent does not relate to excluded subject matter and is capable of industrial application. Relevant claims would have been infringed had they been valid.

Court Disposition

Action for revocation succeeds; counterclaim for infringement dismissed.

Orders

  • A series of amendments disallowed
  • B series of amendments allowed but claims invalid