Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Sterlite Technologies Limited – Appellant
Versus
HFCL Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of suit and patent details (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on infringement and patent validity (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. analysis of evidence, injunctions, and claims (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. comparison of prior art and its implications (Para 16 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24) |
| 5. assessment of novelty and inventive step (Para 28 , 30) |
| 6. conclusion on prima facie invalidity of patent (Para 35) |
| 7. final orders regarding injunction and terms (Para 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
BRIEF FACTS
1. The present is a suit filed by the Plaintiff- Sterlite Technologies Ltd. - seeking inter alia, an injunction restraining infringement of Indian Patent No. IN335369 (hereinafter "IN'69/suit patent") which relates to optical fiber cables (hereinafter "OFCs"). The Plaintiff claims to be an industry leading integrator of digital networks providing integrated 5G ready end to end solutions ranging from wired to wireless, design to deployment connectivity to compute through core capabilities in Optical Interconnect, Virtualised Access Solutions, Network Software and System Integration. The Plaintiff company was established in the year 1988 as a copper cable manufacturing unit an
 |  |  | |
A patent cannot claim novelty when prior art demonstrates similar technologies, deteriorating its validity, particularly when specific features are not sufficiently distinctive.
An arbitral award can only be set aside for patent illegality; the court cannot overturn the tribunal's factual findings or reappraise evidence.
In patent infringement, independent claims and prosecution history define the inventive scope. If a patentee incorporates a feature in its independent claims to address a specific technical problem, ....
A patent grants exclusive rights to inventors, protecting their inventions against unauthorized use, with mechanisms for enforcing these rights through injunctions and damages for infringement.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of maintaining accounts of manufacture and sales in patent infringement cases and highlighted the need to consider the status of the suit patent and the....
The court upheld that a minimum service life of Optical Fibre Cables, guaranteed at 20 years, imposes liability regardless of warranty expiry, reinforcing obligations established in contractual terms....
An interlocutory injunction can be granted if infringement is established, and no credible challenge to patent validity is presented, even when prior publications and claims are involved.
Patent is prima facie invalid due to prior claiming and non-working, infringing on patent system integrity by prolonging monopoly post-expiration.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
