Date: 19 March 2024
Court: Federal Court
Judge: Yates, Burley and Jackman JJ
Date:
Court:
Judge:
19 March 2024
Federal Court
Yates, Burley and Jackman JJ
MMD has been unsuccessful in its appeal of a decision of a primary judge of the Federal Court which held MMD’s patent valid but not infringed.
MMD’s patent AU2004289510 (MMD’s Patent) is directed to a tooth construction used in a mineral breaker for crushing mineral ore into smaller parts. Camco initially provided repair services for these tooth constructions under contract with MMD, and then continued offering these repairs directly to MMD’s customers after the contract ended.
MMD brought proceedings alleging that Camco’s unauthorised repair services infringed MMD’s Patent, and that Camco contravened s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law by not informing customers about the existence of the patent.
Camco cross-claimed for revocation and also argued that the repair services were permissible under the exhaustion doctrine. The exhaustion doctrine, as recognised under Australian law, provides that a patentee’s rights (other than the right of manufacture) are exhausted after the first authorised sale of the patented product anywhere in the world. As a result, under Australian law, it is permissible for repairs to be made to a patented product after it is sold.
The primary judge found MMD’s Patent to be valid but not infringed, the non-infringement finding resulting from her claim construction. However, the primary judge stated that, had infringement occurred, Camco would not have been able to rely on the repair defence as Camco’s activities amounted to a remaking (i.e. manufacture) of the invention. We reported on that 2023 decision here.
The focus of the appeal was on whether the primary judge fell into error in her claim construction. The Full Federal Court upheld the primary judge’s construction, and therefore the finding of non-infringement. In so doing, the Full Court emphasised the well-known principles of patent construction including the need to adopt a common-sense construction of the patent claims and that, if a claim is clear, it is not to be made obscure simply because obscurities can be found in particular sentences in other parts of the patent. Consequently, MMD’s appeal was dismissed and Camco’s cross-appeal was also dismissed, with no consideration needed in respect of the repair defence.
About Pearce IP
Pearce IP is a boutique firm offering intellectual property specialist lawyers, patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys to the life sciences industries (in particular, pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, biotech, ag-tech and food tech). Pearce IP is the 2021 ‘Intellectual Property Team of the Year’ (Lawyers Weekly Australian Law Awards) and was shortlisted for the same award in 2022. Pearce IP is ranked in IAM Patent 1000 and Managing IP (MIP) IP Stars, in Australasian Lawyer 5 Star Awards as a ‘5 Star’ firm, and the Legal 500 APAC Guide for Intellectual Property.
Our leaders have been recognised in virtually every notable IP listing for their legal, patent and trade mark excellence including: IAM Patent 1000, IAM Strategy 300, MIP IP Stars, Doyles Guide, WIPR Leaders, 5 Star IP Lawyers, Best Lawyers, and Australasian Lawyer 5 Star Awards, and have been honoured with many awards including Australian Law Awards – IP Partner of the Year, Women in Law Awards – Partner of the Year, Women in Business Law Awards – Patent Lawyer of the Year (Asia Pacific), Most Influential Lawyers (Changemaker), among other awards.
Helen Macpherson
Executive, Lawyer (Head of Litigation – Australia)
Helen has over 25 years’ experience as an intellectual property specialist and is recognised as an industry leader. Helen advises on all forms of intellectual property including patents, plant breeder’s rights, trade marks, copyright and confidential information.
Helen is a member of the Intellectual Property Committee of the Law Council of Australia, as well as a member of the Intellectual Property Society of Australia and New Zealand.
Kate Legge
Special Counsel, Lawyer
Kate is an experienced life sciences patent lawyer, providing IP leadership for product development and commercialisation across global markets in pharmaceuticals, biopharmaceuticals, medical technology and devices, digital health and diagnostics – from initial scoping through to post-launch. She has developed and implemented global IP strategies over more than 15 years at multi-national pharmaceutical companies. She is an Australian qualified and registered legal practitioner, and has a Master’s degree in IP Law and a BSc in biochemistry.