Nokia v OPPO & OnePlus [2022] EWHC 2814 (Pat) – Edward acted for Nokia, who were successful in the first UK trial of this multinational patent dispute. Nokia proved their EP560 LTE implementation patent […]
Patents
Privatisation and the Patent Office (1994), by Christopher Morcom KC
Shenzhen Carku Technology Co Ltd v The Noco Company [2020] EWHC 2104 (Pat)
Carku v NOCO [2022] EWHC 2034 (Pat): Edward represented Carku, successfully arguing that NOCO’s use of the Amazon IP complaints procedure gave rise to unjustified threats of patent infringement. In the judgment handed […]
Neurim v Teva [2022] EWHC 954 (Pat)
Edward acted for Teva in successfully resisting an application by Neurim and Flynn Pharma for an interim injunction to restrain Teva’s dealing in its generic prolonged-release Melatonin pharmaceutical product. Led by Charlotte May […]
Commscope v SOLiD Technologies [2022] EWHC 769 (Pat)
Edward acted for the successful defendant, SOLiD technologies, in this patent trial relating to digital DAS technologies for point to multipoint distribution of RF telecommunications over fibre optic cables. The patent in suit […]
Thom Browne Inc. v Adidas AG and Adidas International Marketing B.V.
Thom Browne Inc. v Adidas AG and Adidas International Marketing B.V. Edward Cronan acts for the fashion designer Thom Browne in this claim for revocation of nineteen Adidas trade marks, in which the […]
Advanced Bionics v MED-EL
Advanced Bionics v MED-EL Edward Cronan acted for Advanced Bionics in this medical industry claim for a DNI and for revocation of a patent relating to an MRI-compatible cochlear implant system. Led by […]
Nokia Technologies v OnePlus Technology
UK Patents Court: Overseas Defendants no exception to commitment to 12 month trial timetable In ongoing patent infringement proceedings between Nokia and the phone manufacturer Oppo the Patents Court has demonstrated that it […]
Philip Morris v RAI: British American Tobacco – patent for heated tobacco device revoked for lack of inventive step and added matter
This was a bid by Philip Morris to revoke two British American Tobacco patents revoked for obviousness and added matter. The trial was expedited in order to provide Philip Morris […]
A Ward Attachments v Fabcon Engineering Ltd – “Buzz” test for obviousness and acquiescence based on failure to respond to defendant’s letter
Judgment 29th July 2021 This was a patent infringement case in IPEC which concerned apparatus for receiving freight containers from the bed of a truck. Infringement and validity were in issue. On validity, […]
