2024-11-13 - LD Paris - HP v. Lama - UPC_CFI_358/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_358/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division
- Art:
- Proceeding Decision
- Parteien:
- HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P v. LAMA FRANCE
Kernaussage: The Paris Local Division delivered a seven-headnote decision with a split outcome on HP's two printhead patents.
2024-11-13 - LD Paris - HP
v.
Lama - UPC_CFI_358/2023
landmark
The Paris Local Division decided a two-patent infringement action with a revocation counterclaim and split the outcome. It revoked EP'230 in full for lack of novelty and refused the conditional amendment as obvious, while maintaining EP'669 on a construction of 'address generator' as a circuit that receives a control signal and outputs controlled, sequential address signals, which no cited transistor arrangement or undocumented decoder satisfies. Four points of principle carry the rest. The Court applies Arts. 25 and 26 UPCA, not national law, to infringing acts committed before 1 June 2023, and Art. 72 UPCA runs the limitation five years back from the action. Art. 25 UPCA requires no proof that the defendant knew of the patent, because Art. 68 UPCA's knowledge wording governs financial compensation and not the finding of infringement, and a professional operator is expected to inform itself of its competitors' patents. A competition-law argument raised inside Art. 29 UPCA to reverse the burden of proof on exhaustion is within the Court's competence but fails in limine for want of any serious definition of the relevant market, which is also why no CJEU referral was necessary. On the facts, the finding against the 'clone' cartridges is confined to the one type on which complete tests were run: a similarity analysis between cartridge families does not prove that their electrical operation is the same.
Nichtigkeitsgründe
Art. 138 EPCNovelty
Partially invalid (this ground)Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“The novelty attack succeeded against EP'230: EP 1 172 211 discloses every feature of claim 1, including switches controlled by a clock signal in the 'AND circuits' A1-A160, so claims 1 and 7 and their dependants are void [104]-[113]. Against EP'669 every novelty attack failed, because none of US'882, EP'324, EP'211, JP'113, EP'386 or US'569 discloses an address generator producing address signals from timing signals on select lines [161]-[191].”
Inventive Step
Partially invalid (this ground)Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“The conditional amendment of EP'230, which inserts 'pre-charged' before 'firing cells', lacks inventive step: pre-charging is common general knowledge and US 2005/230493, a document of the same proprietor and field, already shows both pre-charged and non-pre-charged firing cells [118]-[123]. The inventive-step attacks against EP'669 all failed for want of any motivation to add a second address generator [194]-[199].”
Added Matter
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
“Every added-matter objection under Art. 138(1)(c) EPC failed, against EP'230 [64]-[94] and against EP'669 [144]-[159]. The Court examined each argument against the application as filed in English [65].”
Insufficiency of Disclosure
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 83 EPC · Art. 138(1)(b) EPC
“Insufficiency under Art. 138(1)(b) EPC failed for both patents. Figures described as non-claimed examples still belong to the description and may be used, and the skilled person finds in them what is needed to carry out the invention [54]-[62], [138]-[143].”
Inoffiziell
Inoffizielle KI-Übersetzung
Dies ist eine automatische, von KI erstellte Übersetzung, die Fehler enthalten kann. Rechtsverbindlich ist allein das Originaldokument in der Verfahrenssprache (French).