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

External investor-controlled IP firms have both downsides and upsides, so they don’t deserve all the flak they get
Andrew Blattman, CEO of IPH, tells Managing IP what’s next for the group in Canada and how it navigates issues such as conflicts and cost efficiency
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
In-house counsel explain how they develop or maintain 'IP-aware' cultures at their companies and how private practice lawyers can help
Josh Budwin, principal at the firm, said the case was one of the most complex technology disputes he's ever worked on
For the latest article in our regular series covering UPC developments, we summarise five rulings and highlight what’s expected later this month
John Keville, partner at Sheppard Mullin, explains how he secured a patent subject matter eligibility victory for his client against GoPro
An IP partner at Womble Bond Dickinson explains how its combination with Lewis Roca will create a fully-rounded litigation and prosecution service
Ronen Speyer of Evalueserve explains why in a competitive business landscape, IP has become a key driver in gaining a competitive advantage
Michael Sharp, who moved to Canadian firm Field Law from Aurora Cannabis in June, said he is enjoying cross-practice collaboration at his new firm
Gift this article