Posted: June 9th, 2022
Barco N.V. v. Sahara Presentation Systems PLC, District Cout The Hague, 1 June 2022, Case No. HA ZA 19-503
Barco holds EP ‘668 for an ‘Electronic tool and methods for meetings’and markets a presentation system under de name ‘ClickShare’ that incorporates the EP ‘668 technology. ClickShare enables participants to a meeting to share images and information on their computer with other participants through a centrally placed screen in the meeting room.
Sahara markets under the name ‘Clevershare’ parts of a system that allows for wireless connecting of screens. Clevershare also allows the sharing of images and information via central screen in a meeting room.
Barco – in short- requests an injunction against Sahara, based on alleged infringement of EP ‘668.
After the rejoinder in the current proceedings between Barco and Sahara, a Dutch Court invalidated EP ‘668 in proceedings between Barco and Delta. Barco appealed this judgment and the Delta judgment is not yet final. Accoring to Dutch Supreme Court Decision Enka v. Dupont, a judgment invalidating a patent deprives that patent’s effect, effective immediately on the condiction that the judgment becomes final in the end. In the period of uncertainty (literally: ‘zwevende’ or ‘floating’ period) no injunction based on infringement can be obtained. It is therefore custom to suspend pending proceedings.
Parties in the current proceedings agree that debate on the validity of the patent is not in order. However, Sahara states that it has s legal interest in continuation of the debate regarding the alleged infringement, as long as Barco is of the opinion that Clevershare applies the claimed measures and as long as the possibility exists that EP ‘668 is revived on appeal.
Parties debated in full if Clevershare would infringe EP ‘668 if it were valid. Based on that debate the Court rules that even if the validity of EP ‘668 is taken as starting point, there is no reason to allow the injunction.
The entire judgment (in Dutch) can be read here.