Delhi High Court Upholds Patent Infringement In Favour Of Communication Components Antenna Inc.

In terms of the manner of construing claims, The Division Bench has provided an extensive analysis on the interplay between the claims and the specifications, as also the interplay between claims and the preferred embodiments disclosed in a patent.

In a watershed moment, the aspect of patentable subject matter under Indian Law was stressed upon. Specifically, the Division Bench held that a known product, which is specifically modified and configured to provide a specified result of an economic value, would be considered to be patentable as it would be a new product.

The Division Bench further held that “if the said product is novel and a distinct improvement over the known technology, its patent would not be vulnerable to challenge on the ground that antennae emitting asymmetrical beams were disclosed by prior arts.” The Division Bench further held that “It would be erroneous to assume that a patent in respect of such a product is required to be denied on the ground that it is covered under the broad classification of antennae that emit asymmetrical beams.”.

As regards the scope of claims being broader than the preferred embodiments disclosed in a patent, the Division Bench rejected the contention that an erroneous test was applied for ascertaining “whether the beam pattern of the antennae manufactured and dealt with by the appellants, are similar to the beam patterns as disclosed in the Suit Patent.”

Based on this, the Division Bench concluded the method of comparing the beam patterns for ascertaining the Suit Patent’s infringement as err free.

Background Of the Case:
The Plaintiff, Communication Components Antenna Inc., had filed a suit for infringement of patent against the Defendants, Ace Technologies Corp. and its group companies, in the year 2018. By way of a detailed judgment, dated 12 July 2019, a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court had found the Defendants to be infringing the Plaintiff’s patent. The learned Single Judge had also rejected the invalidity challenge raised by the Defendants against the patent. As an interim measure, the learned Single Judge had directed the Defendants to secure Rs.54.5 Crore (which represented 10% of the sales revenue generated by the Defendants from sale of the infringing products), by way of bank guarantee and cash deposit, failing which an injunction was to follow. The Defendants had filed an appeal against this order of the learned Single Judge, which has now been dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.

Counsel for Appellants: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate and briefed by a team of Mr. Vineet Rohilla and Mr. Rohit Rangi from Remfry & Sagar.

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Gaurav Pachnanda, Senior Advocate and briefed by Mr. Sidhant Goel, Mr. Mohit Goel, Mr Aditya Goel and Mr. Deepankar Mishra from Sim And San - Attorneys at Law, and Ms. Avni Sharma and Mr. Kaustabh Kapoor.

Title: ACE TECHNOLOGIES CORP AND ORS. v. COMMUNICATION COMPONENTS ANTENNA INC.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 313

Click here to read/ download order