Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

India court hands down another SEP-based injunction

Ericsson has secured another injunction in the Delhi High Court based on its standards essential patents

xiaomishanghai1.jpg

Xiaomi has grown to become China's largest smartphone brand in just four years. Picture of the company's Shanghai store courtesy of Xiaomi's Weibo

Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court handed down an ex parte injunction against Chinese mobile device manufacturer Xiaomi, the world’s third biggest shipper of smartphones after Samsung and Apple. According to a copy of the order obtained by SpicyIP, Ericsson is asserting patents covering three technology standards:

  • Patents IN203034, IN203036, IN234157, IN203686 and IN213723 are part of the AMR codec, an audio compression format used in cell phones;

  • Patents IN229632 and IN240471 are part of the 3G standard, and

  • IN241747 is part of the EDGE data-transmission standard.

Justice GP Mittal granted the injunction, noting that Ericsson had contacted Xiaomi to discuss a licence for the patents, but Xiaomi appears to have moved forward in entering the market without securing a licence. Justice Mittal also found that the Ericsson made out its prima facie case for an interim injunction and that the balance of interests is in its favour as it would otherwise suffer irreparable injury.

Under the order, Xiaomi is barred from manufacturing, importing, selling or advertising the allegedly infringing products. Customs is also ordered to stop shipments of any covered products. In addition, Xiaomi is ordered to provide information regarding revenue earned and the volume of sales of products that may be covered by the patents.

In addition, the court also granted Ericsson’s request for an inspection of Xiaomi’s premises to obtain evidence.

According to news reports, Xiaomi had not received notice of the order as of today.

A familiar tactic

Ericsson’s approach in this case is similar the actions it took against India handset manufacturer Micromax last year. In that dispute, Ericsson also secured an ex parte injunction at the outset. The injunction in that dispute similarly involved patents essential to the AMR, EDGE and 3G standards.

In Ericsson-Micromax matter, the parties came to an interim agreement allowing Micromax to continue selling the covered products in exchange for it agreeing to make interim royalty payments to the court. It remains whether to be seen whether Xiaomi and Ericsson will make a similar agreement.

The issue of whether to grant injunctions when standards-essential patents involved is one that many countries are struggling with, with some commenters suggesting that SEPs involving a FRAND commitment should never be the basis of an injunction absent bad faith by the potential licensee.

Shamnad Basheer at SpicyIP takes issue with the injunction granted against Xiaomi and several other injunctions granted by Indian courts. In particular, he notes that where the SEP holder has made a FRAND commitment and the only dispute is the royalty rate itself, there is no irreparable damage as required for an interim injunction.

The perils of leaving home

Xiaomi’s patent troubles in India may be a sign of further troubles to come in its plan to grow its business beyond China, where it is already the largest smartphone maker by shipment. Despite the rapid growth of Chinese companies in catering to its domestic customers, Chinese brands are only beginning to make inroads into markets abroad.

Some sceptics suggest that while Chinese heavyweights such as ZTE, Huawei and Lenovo have had success breaking into international markets, they are the exception rather than the rule. While these three have substantial patent filings abroad (last year, ZTE and Huawei ranked second and third in PCT filings respectively, while Lenovo has among other things the patents it acquired when it purchased IBM’s PC business), Xiaomi has just 15 granted patents listed on SIPO’s website. According to a USPTO search, Xiaomi is named as the assignee in one design patent and one invention patent, while it is listed as the applicant on just six granted patents on Espacenet.

In fact, despite Xiaomi’s explosive growth (recent fundraising suggests that the company, which started in 2010, may be worth $40 to 50 billion), there is concern whether it can grow beyond the Chinese market because its IP-light strategy that works domestically may have problems in developed markets. The issue may extend beyond Xiaomi’s small patent portfolio, as some commenters have noted the company’s apparent fondness for both product and store designs that are similar to Apple’s.

CS Vaidyanathan, Senior Advocate, Prathiba M Singh and Singh & Singh are representing Ericsson in this matter. Prathiba Singh is also representing Ericsson in its dispute with Micromax.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Shira Perlmutter, US Register of Copyrights, discussed the Copyright Office's role in forming generative AI policy during a House of Representatives hearing
The award marks one of the highest-ever damages received by a foreign company in a trademark infringement suit in China
Two orders denying public access to documents have reignited a debate over a lack of transparency at the new court
Rouse’s new chief of operations and the firm’s CEO tell Managing IP why they think private equity backing will help it conquer Europe
Brian Landry, partner at Saul Ewing, reveals how applicants can prosecute patent applications in the wake of the Federal Circuit's In re Cellect ruling
Ronelle Geldenhuys of Australia’s Foundry IP considers the implications complex computer technologies such as AI have on decision-making