Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corp [2007] EWHC 1921 (Pat) (01 August 2007)

Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corp [2007] EWHC 1921 (Pat) (01 August 2007)

Given the advanced stage of the English proceedings, significant costs already incurred, the need for commercial certainty, and the lengthy delay before EPO opposition would resolve, it would be unjust to deprive the claimant of an early resolution of validity in the English court. The undertakings offered by the defendant do not fully address the commercial uncertainty or public interest in removing invalid patents. The stay is therefore refused.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1921 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant / Part 20 Defendant: Research In Motion UK Limited; Defendant / Part 20 Claimant: Visto Corporation; Part 20 Defendant: Research In Motion Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation and Related Claims / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending EPO Opposition
Outcome
Application for stay refused
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Patent Validity, EPO Opposition, Revocation Actions
Intellectual Property Patents Stay of Proceedings Patent Validity EPO Opposition Revocation Actions

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Research In Motion UK Limited

Claimant / Part 20 Defendant

Visto Corporation

Defendant / Part 20 Claimant

Research In Motion Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation and Related Claims / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending EPO Opposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a stay of English revocation proceedings pending outcome of EPO opposition proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Given the advanced stage of the English proceedings, significant costs already incurred, the need for commercial certainty, and the lengthy delay before EPO opposition would resolve, it would be unjust to deprive the claimant of an early resolution of validity in the English court. The undertakings offered by the defendant do not fully address the commercial uncertainty or public interest in removing invalid patents. The stay is therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application for stay refused

Orders

  • Revocation proceedings in the English court to proceed to trial as scheduled
  • No stay granted pending EPO opposition