Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company v Tyco Electronics Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 315 PATENTS – claimed invention of connector for electrical wires – construction of connector involves use of tongues protruding from side walls of canal in which the cable itself lies – tongues said to combine features of strain relief for the wire and retention of that wire within channel – revocation on the grounds of lack of novelty – alleged infringement by appellant's electrical connector – whether the appellant's connector possessed all essential integers of the claim PATENTS – lack of inventive step – use of a "team" rather than an individual as the notional univentive skilled worker – relevant general knowledge at the priority date – the distinction between what is a logical step to the notional worker and what is obvious to that worker EVIDENCE – expert evidence as to obviousness – whether admissible – utility of – Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 76, 79, 80& 135 Patents Act 1952 (Cth) ss 40, 100(1). Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 6, 13(1), 18(1), 40, 138(3), 230, 233, 234. Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 76, 79, 80 & 135. HPM Industries Pty Ltd v Gerard Industries Ltd (1957) 98 CLR 424 cited. Sunbeam Corporation v Morphy-Richards (Aust.) Pty Ltd (1961) 180 CLR 98, followed. Meyers Taylor Pty Ltd v Vicarr Industries Ltd (1977) 137 CLR 228, followed. Graham Hart (1971) Pty Ltd v S W Hart & Co Pty Ltd (1978) 141 CLR 305, followed. Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Australia) Ltd (1980) 144 CLR 253, followed. Wellcome Foundation Ltd v VR Laboratories(Aust) Pty Ltd (1981) 148 CLR 262, cited. Firebelt Pty Ltd v Brambles Australia Limited [2002] HCA 21, followed. Allsop Inc v Bintang Ltd (1989) 15 IPR 686, followed. Elconnex Pty Ltd v Gerard Industries Pty Limited (1991) 32 FCR 491, followed. Winner v Anmar Holdings Pty Ltd (1993) 41 FCR 205, followed.Catnic Components Ltd v N.V. Philips Gloeilampenfabrieken v Mirabella International Pty Ltd (1993) 44 FCR 239, followed. The General Tire and Rubber Company v The Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company Ltd [1972] RPC 457, followed. Windsurfing International Inc v Petit (1983) 3 IPR 449, cited. Windsurfing International Inc v Tabru Marine (Great Britain) Ltd (1984) 3 IPR 498, cited. Catnic Components Ltd v Hill & Smith Limited (1981) FSR 60, followed.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate