Here's a decision from the Court of Appeal on Friday, inward Saint-Gobain PAM SA v Fusion Provida Ltd in addition to another [2005] EWCA Civ 177.
St Gobain, a large fellowship that made surreptitious pipes for sewage in addition to H2O supply, owned a patent for a method of coating buried iron-based pipes which made them resistant to corrosion. The project design was described inward claim 1 of the patent equally comprising a starting fourth dimension porous layer of zinc/aluminium alloy, inward house of zinc, in addition to a minute porous layer, the pore-sealing layer, based on organic or inorganic binder inward aqueous, solvent or pulverization phase. St Gobain sued FP, a minor competitor, for infringement proceedings inward which it was accepted that, if the patent was valid, FP infringed it.
As to validity FP contended that the project design was obvious, having regard to disclosure inward a newspaper published past times the Swedish Corrosion Institute exactly earlier the priority date. That paper, entitled ‘Corrosion resistance coatings of aluminium, zinc in addition to their alloys’, concerned testing of differently coated steel plates. No pipes were tested, nor was at that spot testing of whatever samples which had a porous minute layer – what the patent called a ‘pore sealing layer’. The newspaper did non shout out whatever observation of zinc corrosion products in addition to at that spot was no endeavour to discovery what happened to minor areas of exposed steel, which was an of import facial expression of buried piping protection. In approaching the interrogation of obviousness, Mr Justice Pumfrey constitute that the inventive concept was dark pipe, but made alongside aluminium/zinc alloy instead of zinc. He constitute that the illustration was evenly balanced, equally at that spot were rigid technical reasons for supposing that the illustration was, inward fact, i of uncomplicated exchange of i known protective layer for another, equally suggested inward the Swedish paper. He was ultimately swayed, however, past times historical considerations in addition to held the footstep to last non-obvious in addition to the patent thus valid.
FP appealed, controversy that the trial estimate had erred in addition to that the historical considerations which tipped the residue were irrelevant. They submitted that, since the Swedish newspaper had been published solely exactly earlier the priority date, at that spot was only no room for historical considerations in addition to that the judge’s view, apart from historical consideration, that the illustration was i of substituting i protective layer for another, equally suggested past times the paper, should prevail.
St Gobain: Court of Appeal affirms the validity of its patent
The Court of Appeal, Civil Division (for whom Lord Justice Jacob equally green gave the judgment) dismissed FP's appeal. The argue why historical reasons were of import when the Swedish newspaper came to last considered was simple: the purpose of zinc/aluminium inward house of zinc equally an anti-corrosion coating for inward a higher house terra firma in addition to marine anti-corrosion coatings had been known for or then years. One mightiness good think, inward the absence of the history, that it was self-evident that uncomplicated exchange would move or mightiness rattling good move for buried pipes too. However, no-one had genuinely taken that footstep in addition to at that spot was naught inward the Swedish newspaper to galvanise the skilled homo into action. Nothing inward the newspaper had made the thought of using zinc/aluminium for pipes obvious.
was intrigued past times this historical approach, which hadn't genuinely occurred to him before.
Rusty pipes here and here
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar