IPcom GmbH & Co Kg v Vodafone Group Plc & Ors

IPcom GmbH & Co Kg v Vodafone Group Plc & Ors

The unconditional claim 1 is invalid for added matter as it discloses a single-step check not directly and unambiguously disclosed in the application. The conditional claims are valid. The patent is not obvious over GSM/GPRS and IS-95. If the LTE access control option is implemented, conditional claim 1 and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: IPCOM GMBH & CO KG; Defendant: Vodafone Group PLC; Defendant: Vodafone Limited; Defendant: Vodafone UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Validity Proceedings / First Instance Judgment After Expedited Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; counterclaim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Added Matter, Obviousness, Crown Use, De Minimis, Indirect Infringement, Declarations of Non Infringement
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Patent Validity Added Matter Obviousness Crown Use De Minimis +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 33 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IPCOM GMBH & CO KG

Claimant

Vodafone Group PLC

Defendant

Vodafone Limited

Defendant

Vodafone UK Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Validity Proceedings / First Instance Judgment After Expedited Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the unconditional and conditional claims of EP(UK) 2,579,666 B1 are valid
  2. 2 Whether Vodafone infringed the patent by its 4G network systems
  3. 3 Whether the patent is essential to the LTE standard

Ratio Decidendi

The unconditional claim 1 is invalid for added matter as it discloses a single-step check not directly and unambiguously disclosed in the application. The conditional claims are valid. The patent is not obvious over GSM/GPRS and IS-95. If the LTE access control option is implemented, conditional claim 1 and unconditional claim 13 are essential and infringed. Vodafone's Crown use defence succeeds for acts done under the MTPAS scheme. The de minimis defence fails. Supply of SIM cards does not amount to indirect infringement. Vodafone is entitled to declarations of non-infringement for certain base stations not set up to send the relevant signals.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; counterclaim allowed in part

Orders

  • Unconditional claim 1 revoked for added matter
  • Conditional claims held valid and infringed if LTE access control is implemented