Posted: July 16th, 2018
UK Court clarifies applicability of “external eyes only” confidentiality regime The issue whether certain licence agreements should only be disclosed on an “external eyes only” basis, i.e. only to external solicitors, counsel and independent experts, was recently decided in the UK by Carr J in the TQ Delta v Zyxel case. The case involved inter […]
READ MOREPosted: May 30th, 2018
Confidentiality roulette in SEP infringement proceedings, by Alexander Haertel and Jonas Block, Kather Augenstein On 25 April 2018 the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf has continued its elaborated case-law with regard to confidentiality arrangements in standard essential patent (SEP) litigation (I-2 W 8/18). The Court deepened its transparency-approach taken already in a decision in January […]
READ MOREPosted: April 20th, 2018
Conversant Wireless Licensing S.A.R,L v (1) Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., (2) Huawei Technologies (UK) Co. Ltd, (3) ZTE Corporation (4) ZTE (UK) Limited, High Court of Justice, London, UK, 16 April 2018, [2018] EWHC 808 (Pat) Are the UK Courts an appropriate forum for hearing a global FRAND dispute where alleged infringement of Chinese patents […]
READ MOREPosted: December 8th, 2017
Communication from the Commission to the Institutions on Setting out the EU approach to Standard Essential Patents “In view of current developments, the Commission considers that SEP licencing should be based on the basis of the following principles: – There is no one-size-fit-all solution on what FRAND is: what can be considered fair and reasonable […]
READ MOREPosted: May 12th, 2017
Core Wireless Licensing (“Core”) asserted five patents related to UTMS, GSM, GPRS, EGPRS and LTE against LG Electronics France (“LGEF”) and LG Electronics Inc. (“LGEI”). In a ruling dated 17 April 2015, the Paris Court of First Instance ruled that none of the patents were essential to the standards and dismissed Core’s claims. In a […]
READ MOREPosted: May 8th, 2017
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries (Europe) B.V. v. Novartis AG, Supreme Court of the Netherlands, 14 April 2017, Case No. ECLI:NL:HR:2017:692 Preliminary injunction proceedings. Patent for second medical indication. Swiss-type claim. Novartis owns EP 1 296 689 with a Swiss type claim for use of zoledronic acid in the preparation of a medicament for the treatment of […]
READ MOREPosted: April 6th, 2017
Unwired Planet International, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd and Huawei Technologies UK Co. Ltd v. Unwired Planet LLC, High Court of Justice, London, UK, 5 April 2017, [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) 806. In summary, my conclusions on the law are: (1) As a matter of French law the FRAND undertaking to ETSI is a legally enforceable […]
READ MOREPosted: March 29th, 2017
Koninklijke Philips NV v. Wiko SAS, Case no. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:2719, Koninklijke Philips NV v. Archos S.A., Case no. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:2720, Koninklijke Philips NV v. Asustek Computer Inc., Asus Europe B.V. and Asus Holland B.V., Case no. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:2721, District Court The Hague, 22 March 2017 The present dispute concerns an alleged infringement of the rights of Koninklijke Philips […]
READ MOREPosted: February 14th, 2017
Archos S.A. v. Koninklijke Philips N.V., NL, District Court of The Hague, 10 February 2017, citation number: ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:1025 Prior to this case, Philips had brought three patent infringement cases regarding UMTS SEPs against Archos in the Dutch court’s accelerated regime. In response, Archos filed this case on the merits, purely regarding the FRAND questions at […]
READ MORE
EMAIL US
