InterDigital wins again in Lenovo SEP dispute

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

InterDigital wins again in Lenovo SEP dispute

Laptop computer displaying logo of Lenovo

The England and Wales High Court ruled that an InterDigital patent was valid and essential to the 3G standard today, January 31

InterDigital scored another win over Lenovo at the England and Wales High Court today, January 31, after a patent it owns was found to be valid and essential to the 3G standard.

The judgment, issued by Mr Justice James Mellor, stemmed from the third technical trial in the pair’s dispute over standard-essential patents (SEPs).

The patent (EP 2,421,318 B1), which was granted in 2013 and has a priority date of August 21 2006, covers a method and apparatus for transmitting scheduling information in a wireless communication system.

Lenovo had argued the patent was invalid due to prior art including a 2006 US patent application and a technical specification published by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project that same year.

In his judgment, Mellor noted the issues in the trial were particularly complex, even for a SEP dispute.

The judge said Lenovo’s evidence suffered from hindsight, and that the case was a rare example of where inventiveness stemmed mainly from the identification of a problem.

Identification of a problem wouldn’t normally be enough to demonstrate inventiveness, the judge noted.

The latest decision comes just more than a week after the Court of Appeal affirmed a separate High Court judgment that found Lenovo had infringed another of InterDigital’s valid and essential patents.

Judgment is still pending from the trial to determine a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalty for InterDigital’s portfolio, heard by Mellor last February.

The highly anticipated FRAND judgment is expected to be handed down later this year.

It will be closely watched by all SEP stakeholders due to the UK’s importance as a venue for such disputes.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Firms explain how they question jurors and account for potential bias in trade secrets cases
A meeting between the EPO and Ericsson, Paul McCartney weighing in on AI and copyright, and a law firm’s STEM pledge were among the top talking points
National courts could combat inconsistencies over the speed of judgments – and provide parties with much-needed certainty – by looking to the UPC
Sources in four jurisdictions discuss the downsides of delayed judgments and why they prefer a well-reasoned, late finding, over a quick ruling that lacks substance
Counsel discuss how likely SCOTUS is to remand closely watched trademark case, which centres on the principle of corporate separateness
Partners at Baker Botts explain why oral arguments were a crucial factor in convincing the Federal Circuit to affirm a lower court ruling
The operator hopes to capitalise on significant market opportunities presented by evolving voice technologies
Hurtado Rivas is general counsel for brands and marketing properties, anti-counterfeiting and licensing at Nestlé in Switzerland
Stelling is a co-founder of Brand Action
Gift this article