Mitsubishi Electric Corporation & Anor v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co Ltd & Ors (FRAND CMC Judgment)

Mitsubishi Electric Corporation & Anor v Oneplus Technology (Shenzhen) Co Ltd & Ors (FRAND CMC Judgment)

The Defendants must plead the methodology for any essentiality review they intend to rely on and must answer Requests for Further Information 14 and 15 by the specified deadline, to ensure fair case management and avoid evidential ambush.

Parties
Claimant: Mitsubishi Electric Corporation; Claimant: Sisvel International SA; Defendant: Archos SA; Defendant: Sun Cupid Technology HK Ltd; Defendant: NUU Mobile UK Limited; Defendant: OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd; Defendant: Oplus Mobiles Tech UK Limited; Defendant: Reflection Investment B.V.; Defendant: Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp, Ltd; Defendant: Oppo Mobile UK Ltd; Defendant: Xiaomi Communications Co Ltd; Defendant: Xiaomi Inc; Defendant: Xiaomi Technology France SAS; Defendant: Xiaomi Technology UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and FRAND Determination / Ruling on Requests for Further Information at Third Case Management Conference
Outcome
Requests for Further Information 14 and 15 must be answered by Xiaomi Defendants; all Defendants must answer all RFIs by 10 am on 22 March 2021.
Legal Topics
FRAND Licensing, Patent Essentiality Review, Case Management, Pleading Requirements
Intellectual Property Law Patent Law FRAND Licensing Patent Essentiality Review Case Management Pleading Requirements

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mitsubishi Electric Corporation

Claimant

Sisvel International SA

Claimant

Archos SA

Defendant

Sun Cupid Technology HK Ltd

Defendant

NUU Mobile UK Limited

Defendant

OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd

Defendant

Oplus Mobiles Tech UK Limited

Defendant

Reflection Investment B.V.

Defendant

Guangdong Oppo Mobile Telecommunications Corp, Ltd

Defendant

Oppo Mobile UK Ltd

Defendant

Xiaomi Communications Co Ltd

Defendant

Xiaomi Inc

Defendant

Xiaomi Technology France SAS

Defendant

Xiaomi Technology UK Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and FRAND Determination / Ruling on Requests for Further Information at Third Case Management Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Defendants must plead methodology for essentiality review in FRAND context
  2. 2 Whether Defendants must answer specific Requests for Further Information prior to expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Defendants must plead the methodology for any essentiality review they intend to rely on and must answer Requests for Further Information 14 and 15 by the specified deadline, to ensure fair case management and avoid evidential ambush.

Court Disposition

Requests for Further Information 14 and 15 must be answered by Xiaomi Defendants; all Defendants must answer all RFIs by 10 am on 22 March 2021.

Orders

  • Xiaomi Defendants to answer RFIs 14 and 15 by 10 am on 22 March 2021.
  • All Defendants to answer all outstanding RFIs by 10 am on 22 March 2021.