POWELL GILBERT HELPS CLIENT SECURE HIGH COURT VICTORY ON AMAZON TAKE-DOWN REQUESTS

[{“id”:”fs2538lwb93qiz”,”elType”:”container”,”settings”:{“flex_direction”:”column”},”elements”:[{“id”:”5820cba”,”elType”:”container”,”settings”:[],”elements”:[{“id”:”_fs2538lwb93r8i”,”elType”:”widget”,”settings”:{“title”:”The UK High Court has handed down its judgment in litigation brought by Shenzhen Carku Technology Co. Ltd (Carku) against The NOCO Company (NOCO) arising from take-down requests sent to Amazon with the aim of preventing sales of Carku products.

The full judgment can be accessed here.”,”tag”:”h5″,”typography_typography”:”custom”,”typography_letter_spacing”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”0″},”typography_font_size”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”14″},”size”:”14″,”typography_font_weight”:”500″,”typography_line_height”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”15.4″},”title_color”:”#4b2771″,”text_color”:”#4b2771″,”color”:”#4b2771″,”align”:”start”},”widgetType”:”heading”},{“id”:”_fs2538lwb93rb0″,”elType”:”widget”,”settings”:{“title”:”Carku and NOCO are manufactures of rival car jump-starter products. NOCO has prosecuted a campaign for several years to have Carku’s jump-starter products de-listed from the Amazon UK website (representing a large market for such products in the UK), alleging that Carku’s products infringe its patent (GB 2 527 858).

Carku brought proceedings in the Patents Court of the UK High Court seeking declarations that the patent is invalid and not infringed and claiming damages for the loss of sales caused by the de-listing requests, on the basis that they were unjustified threats to bring patent proceedings under section 70 of the Patents Act 1977. NOCO counter-claimed for infringement.

The Court found that:”,”tag”:”h5″,”typography_typography”:”custom”,”typography_letter_spacing”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”0″},”typography_font_size”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”14″},”size”:”14″,”typography_font_weight”:”500″,”typography_line_height”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”15.4″},”title_color”:”#4b2771″,”text_color”:”#4b2771″,”color”:”#4b2771″,”align”:”start”},”widgetType”:”heading”},{“id”:”fs2538lwb93rcy”,”elType”:”widget”,”settings”:{“editor”:”

  1. NOCO’s patent GB 2 527 858 is invalid;
  2. the Carku products that NOCO had de-listed would not have infringed the patent, had it been valid;
  3. that NOCO’s de-listing requests are actionable unjustified threats under the Patents Act 1977; and
  4. there should be an inquiry into the damages that NOCO should pay to Carku.

“,”drop_cap”:”no”},”widgetType”:”text-editor”},{“id”:”_fs2538lwb93rde”,”elType”:”widget”,”settings”:{“title”:””,”tag”:”h5″,”typography_typography”:”custom”,”typography_letter_spacing”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”0″},”typography_font_size”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”14″},”size”:”14″,”typography_font_weight”:”500″,”typography_line_height”:{“unit”:”px”,”size”:”15.4″},”title_color”:”#4b2771″,”text_color”:”#4b2771″,”color”:”#4b2771″,”align”:”start”},”widgetType”:”heading”}],”isInner”:false}],”isInner”:false}]