Delhi High Court
Nokia Technologies Oy vs Guangdong Oppo Mobile ... on 21 March, 2022
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:24.03.2022
00:42:17
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 21st March, 2022
+ CS (COMM) 304/2021 &CC(COMM) 5/2022, I.A. 7706/2021,
I.A. 7708/2021, I.A. 4175/2022
NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY ..... Plaintiff
Through: Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Vaishali
Mittal, Mr. Sidhart Chandra, Ms.
Nikhil Chawla, Ms. Pallavi
Bhagnagar and Ms. Shraddha
Chauhan, Advocates.
versus
GUANGDONG OPPO MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CORP., LTD. & ORS. ..... Defendants
Through: Mr. Saikrishna Rajagopal, Mr.
Siddarth Chopra, Ms. Julien George,
Ms. Anu Paarcha, Mr. Arjun
Godhoke, Mr. Avijit Kumar, Mr.
Aniruddh Bhatia, Ms. N. Parvati, Mr.
Vivek Ayyagiri and Mr. Skanda
Shekhar, Advocates. (M:9953781225)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral)
1.
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
I.A.7708/2021 (u/o II Rule 2 CPC)
2. This is an application under Order II Rule 2 CPC filed by the Plaintiff.
In this application, the Plaintiff inter alia, seeks leave to add further patents
from their portfolio in respect of which infringement may occur in future
and also seek leave to add new devices which may be infringing. The
present application seeks the following prayers:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:24.03.2022
00:42:17
"11. In light of the above, it is most respectfully
prayed before this Hon'ble Court that it may be
pleased to pass the following reliefs in favour of the
Plaintiff:
i. Grant leave to the Plaintiff to add to or amend
claims as prayed for in the plaint filed in the present
proceedings, including a claim for infringement of
additional claims of the suit patents as well as of
additional patents held by the Plaintiff which are
found to be infringed by the Defendants' devices at a
later stage in the proceedings;
ii. Grant leave to the Plaintiff to amend its claim for
infringement of patents by including additional
devices manufactured by the Defendants which are
found to be infringing at a later stage in the
proceedings;
iii. Grant leave to the Plaintiff to amend or add to the
list of Defendants at a later stage in the present
proceedings;
iv. Grant leave to the Plaintiff to enhance its claim for
damages to a quantum higher than INR 2,00,00,000 at
a later stage in the present proceedings."
3. A perusal of the prayers extracted above shows that the Plaintiff seeks
leave of this Court to reserve rights in respect of the following -
1) Addition of claim for infringement of additional claims of the
suit patents.
2) Adding of further patents which may be found to be
infringing by the Defendants as per the Plaintiff.
3) Adding of further devices/models which may be found to be
infringing, which may be already in existence or that may be
launched by the Defendants in future.
4. This present suit seeks permanent injunction restraining infringement
qua the following three patents:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:24.03.2022
00:42:17
a. Patent No. 259932 titled "ARRANGING HANDOVER";
b. Patent No. 264783 titled "METHOD FOR CONTROLLING
THE GRAPHICAL DISPLAY OF A PORTABLE
ELECTRONIC DEVICE";
c. Patent No. 266531 titled "REDUCE INTERFERENCE IN A
TERMINAL DEVICE BASED ON INFORMATION TYPE";
5. As per the suit, and as recorded in the Order dated 6th October 2021,
the following devices are infringing the suit patent which are sold by the
Defendants-
i. Oppo Reno 5 Pro
ii. Oppo Reno 4 Pro
iii. Realme X3
iv. Realme 8 Pro
v. OnePlus 8T
6. Mr. Anand, ld. Counsel submits that the suit has been filed only qua
three patents and existing models/devices which have been tested by the
Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff has filed this application under Order II
Rule 2 CPC seeking leave to add the above reliefs in future. Mr. Rajagopal,
ld. Counsel, on the other hand submits that the addition of new patents in the
infringement action could delay the suit further and would further
complicate procedure in the present suit. However, insofar as the devices are
concerned, the leave to add the same in the present suit may be granted.
7. Heard ld. counsels for the parties. In patent infringement suits, this
Court notices that suits are filed on the basis of the claims/patents asserted in
respect of devices which may be readily available on which testing is done
to check infringement. During pendency of the suit, the Defendant may
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:24.03.2022
00:42:17
launch new models or the Plaintiff may realise that further patents or claims
are also infringed. However, in every such case, filing of fresh suits or
moving amendment applications under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC would delay
and complicate the adjudication of the suit. There is therefore a need to give
some flexibility in terms of addition of new devices/models which may be
found infringing by the Plaintiff qua the suit patent in the existing suit itself.
The said need is felt by the Court considering the nature of a patent
infringement suit where the suit is filed based upon certain patents, which
are asserted qua certain devices which may be found to be infringing in
order to avoid the multiplicity of proceedings.
8. Accordingly, insofar as the assertion of additional claims or adding of
further devices/models qua the suit patent are concerned, the Plaintiffs are
given liberty to assert the same by means of a separate affidavit which may
be filed by the Plaintiff with test reports, if any, prior to framing of issues. If
the issues have already been framed in the suit, then the same may be
asserted by means of affidavit in evidence, which may be filed by the
Plaintiff. In response to such an affidavit of the Plaintiff, the Defendant
would be given liberty to rebut the same at the appropriate stage.
9. Insofar as addition of further patents is concerned, if the Plaintiff
wishes to assert infringement of other patents, a fresh suit would have to be
filed by the Plaintiff. However, the Plaintiff would be at liberty to pray for
consolidation at the appropriate stage.
10. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of with the direction
that the Plaintiff is at liberty to avail of its remedies in accordance with law
in respect of any additional patents, which it may wish to assert against the
Defendant. As far as addition of model/devices that are found to be
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:DEVANSHU JOSHI
Signing Date:24.03.2022
00:42:17
infringing the suit patents is concerned, the Plaintiff is at liberty to file an
affidavit in accordance with the directions issued above, adding the said
models/devices or asserting additional claims qua the suit patent, in the
present suit itself.
11. The application under Order II Rule 2 CPC being I.A. 7708/2021 is
disposed of in the above terms.
I.A.4175/2022
12. This is an application seeking retention of the matter as part heard.
However, since the matter has already been released from part heard, the
application has become infructuous and the same is disposed of accordingly.
CS (COMM) 304/2021 &CC (COMM) 5/2022, I.A.7706/2021,
13. Sealed cover relating to sale of the Defendant's devices in terms of
the order dated 9th August, 2021 read with order dated 6th October, 2021
passed by this Court is stated to have been filed. Registry is directed to place
the said sealed cover in sealed form before the Court on the next date of
hearing.
14. If any other data is to be filed before the Court by the Defendant, in
compliance of the previous orders passed by this Court, last and final
opportunity is granted to place the same in a sealed cover within one week.
15. The application for interim injunction was partly heard previously,
however, the same has been released from part heard.
16. List on 5th April, 2022 at 2:30 pm for hearing in the interim injunction
application.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MARCH 21, 2022/dk/sk
