Jushi Group Co, Ltd v OCV Intellectual Capital, LLC

Jushi Group Co, Ltd v OCV Intellectual Capital, LLC

The patent is valid because the prior art did not anticipate the claims either by specific example or by overlapping ranges, as it was not established that the skilled person would seriously contemplate making the claimed compositions. The alleged workshop modifications were not shown to be obvious, and the patent, to the extent it overlapped with the prior art, constituted a valid selection invention. Infringement was admitted if the patent was valid.

Parties
Claimant: Jushi Group Co., Ltd; Defendant: OCV Intellectual Capital, LLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Patent Revocation and Declaration of Non Infringement With Counterclaim for Threatened Infringement / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Patent held valid; threatened infringement established in relation to Product 2.
Legal Topics
Patent Validity, Novelty, Inventive Step, Selection Inventions, Infringement, Prior Art, Construction of Numerical Ranges
Intellectual Property Patent Law Patent Validity Novelty Inventive Step Selection Inventions Infringement Prior Art +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jushi Group Co., Ltd

Claimant

OCV Intellectual Capital, LLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Revocation and Declaration of Non Infringement With Counterclaim for Threatened Infringement / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the patent lacks novelty over the prior art (Neely)
  2. 2 Whether the patent lacks inventive step over the prior art (Neely)
  3. 3 Whether the claims are anticipated by overlapping ranges in the prior art

Ratio Decidendi

The patent is valid because the prior art did not anticipate the claims either by specific example or by overlapping ranges, as it was not established that the skilled person would seriously contemplate making the claimed compositions. The alleged workshop modifications were not shown to be obvious, and the patent, to the extent it overlapped with the prior art, constituted a valid selection invention. Infringement was admitted if the patent was valid.

Court Disposition

Patent held valid; threatened infringement established in relation to Product 2.

Orders

  • Patent not revoked
  • Declarations of non-infringement refused for Product 2