Hyundai Motors ended up losing in Patent Litigation

Hyundai Motor lost in patent invalidation lawsuit,

HYUNDAI MOTOR has finally lost of its patent infringement lawsuit with a SME. Hyundai Motor has been in a dispute with BJC, a small and medium-sized company with a patent on the odor removal method from automobile painting process. The Supreme Court finally handed over the BJC's hand in the patent invalidation lawsuit filed by BJC against HYUNDAI MOTOR's patent, and it seems that HYUNDAI MOTOR's patent technology will be nullified.

flickr.com © Open Grid Scheduler

 Controversy over stealing technology of Hyundai Motor,

HYUNDAI MOTOR and BJC have jointly registered the related patents in 2006 by jointly studying the technology to remove odors that occurred during the coating process since 2004. However, in 2015, HMC has developed a new technology for deodorization in cooperation with Kyungpook National University. After HMC filed a patent alone, they terminated the contract with BJC a few months later. In response, BJC has claimed that Hyundai Motor took over their technology, filed a lawsuit for invalidation of registered patents, and the controversy over stealing technology has begun.

pixabay.com

 Invalidity trial and Appeal, and Supreme Court,

The patent invalidation lawsuit lasted about four years. In response to the BJC's request for invalidation of the trial, the Patent Tribunal acknowledged that the patentability of HYUNDAI MOTOR's patented technology was invalid, and the patent court they appealed also judged the patent invalid. However, they appealed again to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and maintained the judgment of the court, which judged the patent invalid.

pixabay.com

 An unfinished dispute,

The Supreme Court ruling invalidated the patent, but the dispute between Hyundai Motor and BJC is not likely to end. The ruling was based on whether the patent was invalid or not, but the lawsuit which BJC filed against Hyundai Motor for breach of the subcontract and fair trade laws is still going on. Currently, the first trial has made a non-complaint about the alleged technology depletion, but the BJC has appealed. As the Supreme Court finds that the patent is invalid, it is necessary to see how the lawsuit will proceed in the future. The dispute between Hyundai Motor and BJC is likely to continue for a while.

A beer-can design thinking of environment

ideatovalue.com

Fit Packs (Corona Beer Can)

If you look at the design of the recently launched canned beer, the shape of the top and bottom is the same. So that you can stack several beer cans in a stable manner.

The beer brand, Corona, presented a more practical and environmentally conscious beer-can design.

This design, named 'Fit Packs', made the can top and bottom of the can be spirals, allowing the can to be inserted into each other. It is very good for not just stacking, but also it does not need to use the plastic rings or boxes for a large number of cans.

If you want to buy 3 of canned beer, you can put 3 cans together. If you want to buy 6, you can put 6 cans together. It is a simple yet practical and funny idea, but also an idea for the environment.

Introducing a micro plastic cleaner to clean the ocean

©oui.surf
(for all the five pictures above)

Hoola One

Recently, the importance of marine pollution due to micro-plastics has been reported. It's said that the micro-plastics of less than 5mm is not filtered by the sewage  treatment facility so that it flows into the river and the sea as it is.

When marine organisms ingest them, they're eventually returned to the people who eat marine life, so measures are needed.

This cleaner, called 'Hoola One', is a vacuum cleaner dedicated to beach micro-plastics developed by students of an university in Quebec, Canada. When you use the vacuum cleaner to suck up micro-plastics with sand, the plastics in the connected water tank floats in the water and the sand and stones sink, and only the filtered sand and pebbles are sent back to the beach.

It's currently working on the problem through the test run, and the recent test showed very satisfied results.

Hopefully we can get a product out of the micro-plastics risk that could pose a threat to humans.

[WIPSTUDY#7] IP 4 Countries' Patent Trial and Appeal

From 7th issue of WIPSTUDY,
we're going to take a look at the contents of the trial information of IP 4 countries (US, EP, JP, KR) such as docket, decision of appeal, and show how to utilize those trial contents needed for responding to trial and procedure in IP 4 countries.

• Contents of Trial and Appeal of IP 4 countries
• Trial features of each country
• Trial and Appeal of US

< search n analysis database : WIPS Global >

  [ Chart 01 ]

   The entire process of trial is not much different for all the 4 countries but it doesn't mean that all of the trials should go through every step of the process in the same way.
We can analyze the patents and the case information of IP 4 countries and use them to practice and respond trial.

   ➤ Check and analyze patents linked to trial is essential and make it more effectively build up strategies for the future disputes. 

   PTAB has been requested a lot more than ever because of low cost and quick process for decision, which helps to save time and cost comparing to litigation.

wipsglobal.com > Trial/Appeal search

◀ Trial search shows that 9,483 cases are requested IPR as of June 2019.

wipsglobal.com > Trial/Appeal search > SmartAngle

◀ 4,795 cases out of (searched above) 9,483 are appeared 'litigation existing', which means these cases are on-going trial and litigation.

⏪ Which also means, defendant are actively responding by invalidity lawsuit.
(For IPR, the invalidity appeal needs to be filed within one year from the service date)

wipsglobal.com > Trial/Appeal search

• Petitioner: Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing company
• Patent owner: Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
• Filing: Oct. 18, 2018
• Closed: Feb. 13, 2019
• Claims challenged: 6, 7, 11, 13 and 14
• PTAB outcome: No claims invalidated/canceled

◀ PTAB outcome was released in 4 months since the case filed.  

[ Chart 02 ]

▲ Patent trial information from each 4 country is as follows;

US : PTAB (Patent Trial & Appeal Board) is explained in more detail in the Chart 03. 

EP : Confirm the issued patents. Opposition and Appeal cases released from BoA
(Board of Appeal)
JP : Objection to Decision of Rejection and Opposition etc. which mostly happens in Japanese patent court are searched and the corresponding patents.
KR : Trial cases by each trial type such as Appeal against final rejection, Invalidation from IPT (Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board), Patent Court of Korea, Supreme Court, also the corresponding patents.

[ Chart 03 ]

(1) After AIA, PTAB's invalidity cases of IPR (Inter Partes Review), PGR (Post Grant Review), CBMR (Covered Business Method Review) and DER (Derivation), and the corresponding patents are analyzed.

(2) Appeal cases on trial decision of FOA (Final Office Action) and Re-exam/ Re-issue cases. Corresponding patents on Appeal are analyzed.

(3) PTAB trial's docket (PDF & time history) and decision documents on appeal are reviewed.

(4) References on PTAB's invalidity decision (whether its evidences is '102 or '103) are reviewed.


US AIA Trial cases and appeal cases will be reviewed in the next issue of WIPSTUDY.

Continued...>>

Adidas 'three parallel stripes' design, trademark not valid

On March 19^th, the General Court of the European Union confirmed that Adidas 'three parallel stripes' design is not discernible and can not be considered a trademark. Adidas has been using the 'three parallel stripes' design for a variety of items such as clothing, shoes, and accessories, and has used it like Adidas' original design. The court's ruling denied the monopoly power of the three-line design, attracting interest from the industry and the public.

pixabay.com

Adidas and Belgian Shoe Branding Europe in Belgium has been in conflict for about 10 years with the trademark right of the 'three parallel stripes' design. The dispute between the two companies is very complex. Shoe Branding, which uses a two parallel stripes design as a logo, has asked the European Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to cancel the trademark registration for Adidas's 'three parallel stripes' design trademark. EUIPO accepted the trademark of Adidas as invalid and Adidas appealed but lost again.

infusionlawyers.com

Adidas, however, has filed a lawsuit requesting the General Court to cancel the trademark of Shoe Branding, arguing that it poses a threat to its trademark and reputation. At this time, Adidas won, and Shoe Branding appealed to the European Court of Justice of the European Union (ECI). At that time, ECI acknowledged Shoe Branding's claim and sent the case back to the general court, but the general court once again accepted Adidas and blocked Shoe Branding trademark registration. However, Shoe Branding did not stop here and asked ERIPO to declare that the trademark of Adidas''three parallel stripes” design is not valid, and it was the ruling that the trademark right of the three parallel stripes design was invalid on the 19th.

intomark.com > WIPS trademark search database
<Adidas 3-parallel stripes trademark in Korea>

What is the future of Adidas 'three parallel stripes?

Adidas had many disputes with other brands similar to the 'three parallel stripes' design.
Among them, Tom Brown changed the number of stripes from 3 to 4 after he was sued by Adidas. Of course, the ruling does not seem to have any effect on Adidas's 'three parallel stripes design, but it seems certain that the EUIPO ruling will affect other brands.

Introducing an ideas products that can deliver messages on the road

RoadWayve

This LED Display communicates the car-driver’s actions to help reduce road-rage.

yankodesign.com (above all three photos)

There’s sometimes a moment when you want to deliver a message to your car while you’re driving,

Also sometimes you want to say thank you after interrupting, or to tell the car to stop honking.

However, there were often times that you had no choice but to flicker or shaking your hand.

RoadWayve is an idea product that can help you express how you feel.

A small electronic display board is installed on the rear of the car to display a message and a small remote control unit is installed on the driver's seat to allow the driver to show the desired message to the driver back.

You can deliver basic messages like “Thank you, I'm Sorry,” etc. that are entered by default, along with the icon, or you can forward a message that please go ahead of me, or please turn off the high beam.

In addition, it is possible to output the phrase that the user designates, so that various messages can be delivered to the rear car.

RoadWayve seems to be able to reduce the frustration in the car a little bit.