Technetix BV et al v Teleste Limited [2019] EWHC 126 (IPEC)
Technetix alleged infringement of UK Patent No. 2 382 473 B entitled “Cable Tap Unit” by Teleste’s Tap Bank product. The Patent claims a cable tap unit with receptor means, into which a directional coupler can be inserted independently of the group of signal outputs. The Directional coupler taps off a proportion of the main line signal in a trunk cable so that its strength when ultimately fed to the consumer set-top box lies within the required range. It was common ground that the Tap Bank does not include the “receptor means” of the Patent, but Technetix argued that the Tap Bank nevertheless infringes as an equivalent because it incorporates directional couplers in a directional coupler block as an immaterial variant of the patented invention.
Teleste counterclaimed for revocation, citing two pieces of prior art:
(1) Rocci, a US patent granted to AM Communications Inc on 15 October
1991 and (2) Toner, a US patent granted to Toner Cable Equipment Inc on
18 September 2001.
Hacon HHJ heard the trial on 28-29 November 2018. Technetix’s claim for infringement by equivalents would have succeeded (subject to a Formstein defence, if such a defence were to exist in this jurisdiction) had the Patents been valid. However, the Judge held the Patent anticipated by both pieces of prior art.
Adam Gamsa appeared as sole counsel for Technetix, instructed by Kempner & Partners LLP