ATAS/795/2007 · Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

ATAS/795/2007 • CJ GE ATAS/795/2007 Généré par l'IA

Patent Infringement Analysis: Literal Scope and Doctrine of Equivalents

Numéro de cause ATAS/795/2007

Autorité / Tribunal Cour de Justice (Cour civile) · Chambre des assurances sociales

Juridiction

Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)

Date de la décision 2007-07-09

Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)

Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The litigation concerned whether certain acts constituted patent infringement, specifically focusing on whether the accused process utilized all the limitations of the asserted patent claims. The court determined that the accused process was not equivalent to the patented process because it omitted a required step present in the claims, concluding that the lack of this step meant there was no infringement under the literal reading of the claims. Furthermore, the court rejected the argument for infringement under the doctrine of equivalents because the omitted step was not present in the accused process, and applying the doctrine would impermissibly broaden the claims beyond their scope, as evidenced by prior art considerations and the prosecution history.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Patent Infringement Analysis: Literal Scope and Doctrine of Equivalents: The court determined that the accused process was not equivalent to the patented process because it omitted a required step present in the claims, concluding that the lack of this step meant there was no infringement under the literal reading of the claims. Furthermore, the court rejected the argument for infringement under the doctrine of equivalents because the omitted step was not present in the accused process, and applying the doctrine would impermissibly broaden the claims beyond their scope, as evidenced by prior art considerations and the prosecution history.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA

contrefaçon de brevet domaine de la loi du contrat théorie de l'incorporation brevet essentiel action en nullité de marque degré de la preuve

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Cited in the dispositive to regulate court costs.

Généré par l'IA

A/495/2007

Patent Infringement Analysis and No Infringement Finding

A/2502/2003

Patent Infringement Liability Determination

A/737/2006

Patent Claim Interpretation Regarding Numerical Limitations and Doctrine of Equivalents

A/2017/2005

Patent Infringement and Validity Regarding Patented Process

A/1417/2004

Patent Infringement Dispute Regarding Use of Patented Invention

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Cited in the dispositive to regulate court costs.

Texte complet

!"#!

$%$&&&' ()% *

+ %*+& '& $& +%&' $'*

, !

'-./

!"! # $ % & " '"

$ % $$ $$$ ( $$ $ "&! ( % #'&""" )%

* +,-*

0 2 3! 3 / 3!&4 +11-% $ & "& 5&" 3 "" 3( "4 3 ' 0) 3!&4 +11- "% 3(" "% 6! 3 3 '7 ( !" 3 7" 3 % ! 01 & )8--% &"6 2 49& 3 ' 5 5 " : 3" 3 ). 6!5 " - & +11- " 3"&" ! ; :*<

(7" 3 7" 3"% :"" & "" !"" "! ; (3" 3 ). 6!5 +11- " 2( (" 4 3 5 3 6= " % 3 (3" 3

- & +11- "&"& 33" 7" % 3 " 2 ("5" '7 "2! >" +11- " " 3 3!6&" "! ; (3" 3 ). 6!5 +11- (77" 4"! 3 $ <

?! 6&! " 3" 3 +@ 3!&4 +11- <

3! " 3 +- "4 +11/% $ % 9 5 & 3 ; 5 &!3 " 3" " 2 5 3 &!3*% % !" # A '7% >"! ? " <

?! ">"! " "" 3! 3" 3 @ 3!&4 +11/% " ; ?" 3 3! 2?; 2 $ " 3&! ;

3 '7 6 " " 3 7 3!" 3 3"% " ( !" 3 )+ >" +11-<

( 63 3 % '"&" !! '7 3 &<

3 ! 3 )8 & +11@% $ "! 3 <

4 3 ! !3! ; (3" 3 % 2"! 3 "!&% +. & +11@<

3 ?3 3 & " 2 5% " " 5 2? : " & !&" !"" ! : 6 3?!"4 ! 3 7" 7' " 3"&" ! ; (3" 3 ). 6!5 +11- ", 3 - & +11- <

3 +- > +11@% 4 3 ! 3! : " >" 3 & 3(: " 2 & 3 3: : " ; ':<

,./0),+11/ * 0,-*

( 3! !"! "B! : " 6 3 & !"% !'!"% 2" ; ; (: " " ; 6 " 3 &"6 !5" 3 !" <

" " 3!"&!% " B" 6" " 3 ': 3 . >" +11@ <

1 2 4 3 ! " & !"" &"9% 3 !" ) C" +110 D"E-/ 3 ?7" >3 * F <

" 7!! 3 D F% "! 57 ) >5 +110% " 4 3? 9 <

% 3! ! 3 6& " 3! !5 " 54 D"E -/ " /1 F <

2" !4 ; ?:& 3?!5" "" 3 (*3" ; !3 " 3 5 49& 3 7" 3" !"! " " !2 3 3" 5 ). 6!5 +11- ", - & +11- <

?""! 3&""5 3" "" 3?66 6" 3!"&"% ?"*;*3 "" " 3" 3! 3 ? " 3 97 3 3" D # ))@ +/) 3E 0 E +/0 < E A 3 3 $G5'7'"% )88.% "E)% E .0HF <

? ?3&"" " " 3?3 "" & !&" 2 !7" 3 " " !!&" "" 3 3 29" " &% " 2? " 3" &"" I5 : " 2? J" ! 3 6 3 " &!3: D # ))@ +H+ 3E .% E +H0 < )8H- E +.1 3E. < A E "EF <

3 K"! >7 2 39 2 6" " 66&&" !3! " 5B ; ?3&"" & !&" 3?"" !3 *&L& ; " "" & !&" D )880 E )0/F <

? &"9 3?*3" &9 " " !6!!% ; & 2 " " 3?3 5 3% && ? 9 D # .0),1+ 3 H 5&4 +11+F <

,./0),+11/ * .,-*

% ' 3$ *4 %*+& '& $& +%&' $'*

551.

)E 3 : " &!3% ?: " B" & 3?:& "

3?"3 % 9 ?L" "! 3 " !!&" " " 9 5 3 3 3 $ % "&&"

372% 2 3 3 3 !" !3% ?"" 3?5 3 " 4 <

+E 6 % !" #A '7 3 &

0E '7 (: " 3 ! 3 : 2" 5"M

E ! 66" 3 7" 3" !"! &&" 3 (3"% 2 3" 66 &&" 3 (: "<

4E :"*"* 3 "! " (3" 3 ). 6!5 +11-% 5 3 - & +11- " ! 3 7" 3"N !'!"% !GE

E 3 ! 66&"5 ; 2" !!3"% 3 3 "! " "% 5&44 &" 4<

3E F 66* 3 "4 3!7!!"6 "! ;

(3"N $ % >"* K 3 B& "&"7 "N

F 3(" 6" !"7 ; (3" >"* K 3 " 3 "4N

E "4 3" 66 "* &6"! 5 3 (3"N

6E & O !"" "! 3!7!!"6 ", &36 >" K% *"* !"! """N 3N $ " (" % "* !5 ( " """ ; (5 "% 3 (66&"5% 23N

7E "5" "2! "* ; &"" " 5 " 3 3" 3 ). 6!5 " - & +11- N !GE

,./0),+11/ * -,-*

'E """ " ; "! 3 73"* "! 3 "5M

F "" 2 5 ; "N (66&"5% 2 " ":

3( "! 3 "5 3" ; "4N $( B !""

"!% 2 " ": 3( "! 3 "5 2( 6" ""4 ; " !""

"! ; (3"N

F 3 "" " "5"!N (66&"5% 2 " ": 3( "! 3 "5 3" ; !5" !"" "! " ; (3" *&L&N

E """ ; "! 3 5 (3"

"""* """ ; ("!7"! 'B2N $ % ; 2 ": "&G* 5 "" """N

>E # "" " &2 "E

.E 5" ?: " ; 3! 3( 161/ ! 551 7 7.5 / 6 <

-E !5 " 3 6 >2(; 3" >7! 63E

7669 !3"

$B5 A P

6& 3 !" L" " "6! : "% ; (66 6!3! 3 2( % " 3 '7 3 &% ; 95 766

,./0),+11/

Patent Infringement Analysis: Literal Scope and Doctrine of Equivalents

Synthèse Legislator

Regeste Legislator

Mots-clés

Dispositions légales citées

Décisions connexes

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Texte complet