A French Manufacturing Group of home appliances had its patent for a hair dryer and hair straightener infringed by a competitor. This competitor was selling the same product as the French Group, under its own distinct brand.

The third party (competitor mentioned above) took a case to court claiming no infraction. The French Group rejected this case as well through a judicial countersuit claiming that their patent had been infringed by unauthorized use of brand name by which their product was commercialized.

What is a case of non-patent infringement?

A case which claims that a specific invention does not infringe a patent in order to avoid a claim of infraction.

What is a judicial countersuit?

It is judicial prerogative by means of which a defendant of a claim can contest a Statement of Claim, by alleging their own claims in a lawsuit, thus, inverting the judiciary structure of a lawsuit.

Why is this case important?

The acting judge dismissed as groundless the claim of non-infringement made by the competitor. The countersuit was upheld in favor of the French group. The conclusion was that the patent in question complied with all the legal formalities required for granting patent privilege. Therefore, it was held valid and enforceable against third parties.

Once the patent infringement was verified against the French Group as well as their trademark ownership, the judge fined the infringer for damages and losses caused by the commercialization of the product in violation of the group’s patent and trademark.