Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Damorgold Pty Ltd v Blindware Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1552 File number: VID 403 of 2015
Judge: MIDDLETON J
Date of judgment: 22 December 2017
Catchwords: PATENTS – infringement – construction of the claims of the patent – construction of "responsive to" PATENTS – validity – novelty – application of reverse infringement test to the US269 Patent, the JP 694 Patent and the Uniline Product PATENTS – validity – inventive step – common general knowledge – obviousness – whether the use of a helper spring was common general knowledge – whether the Uniline Product constitutes information under s 7(3) of the Patents Act 1990 – whether the claimed invention was obvious – where an inventive skilled addressee does not derive the same solution as claimed invention PATENTS – unjustified threats of infringement of a patent – s 128 of Patents Act 1990 not aimed at deterring infringement proceedings CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – alleged failure to warn end users of their potential exposure to liability for patent infringement – alleged false or misleading representations regarding coverage of a patent – a general warning against infringement
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) Patents Amendment Act 2001 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
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