Skip to content

Sisvel International S.A. v. Shenzhen Tinno Mobile Technology Corporation, Wiko SAS et al., interlocutory judgment District Court of The Hague, 21 April 2021, Case No. ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2021:8955

Sisvel holds EP 2 139 272, relating to a ‘Method and system for attaching a mobile equipment to a wireless communication network’. Sisvel reported EP 272 as essential patent under the LTE (‘Long Term Evolution’) / 4G standard. Tinno produces smartphones, while Wiko cs sell these smartphones.

Sisvel commenced various infringement proceedings against Wiko and Xiaomi c.s. In the Sisvel v. Xiaomi proceedings the Court decided (summarized) that the 4G standard does not implement EP 272. In the current proceedings, Wiko did not submit a technical non infringement defence. Instead it wished that the Court applied the ruling in the Xiaomi proceedings mutatis mutandis to the current proceedings.

The Court does not agree and states that what Wiko argues in essence boils down to a third party effect of an infringement judgment. However, contrary to an invalidity judgment, an infringement judgment only has an inter partes effect and does not work erga omnes.

Wiko, so the Court states, could have stated in the statement of defence that it wished to integrally take over the infringement defence of Xiaomi, including the attachment of the relevant procedural documents. However, it failed to do so.

The conclusion of the Court therefore is that Wiko did not provide a reasoned defence against Sisvel’s infringement allegations.

A copy of the decision can be read here.