Saab Seaeye Ltd v Atlas Elektronik GmbH & Anor

Patent claims are construed purposively in the context of the description and drawings. The inventor’s purpose informs construction, but the language chosen delineates the protected territory. Dictionary definitions may assist, but they are acontextual and cannot displace the meaning conveyed to the skilled person by the specification.

A claim expressed in functional language may cover every means which performs the specified function unless its wording or context imposes a narrower limitation. Accordingly, a trigger mechanism was not confined to purely mechanical arrangements, and means for detachable connection covered passive features adapted to permit gripping and release.

The owners of two patents concerning underwater mine-clearance devices counterclaimed for infringement after Saab sought revocation. Mann J, in [2015] EWHC 3163 (Pat), held claims 1 and 2 of patent 576 invalid for obviousness but otherwise rejected the validity challenges.

Saab appealed against the validity of claims 1 and 3 of patent 861. Atlas appealed against the invalidity of claims 1 and 2 of patent 576. The central issues were whether the 861 patent’s “trigger mechanism” was confined to purely mechanical arrangements and whether the 576 patent’s “means for detachable connection” required more than a passive feature adapted for gripping and release.

1. Saab’s appeal concerning patent 861 was allowed, and Atlas’s appeal concerning patent 576 was dismissed. Kitchin LJ agreed with Floyd LJ.

2. Patent claims must be construed purposively in the context of the description and drawings, consistently with Article 69 of the European Patent Convention. Purpose is important, but the court remains concerned with the meaning of the language used. Dictionary definitions may inform that inquiry, although they are acontextual and may not reflect the patentee’s particular purpose.

3. The skilled person would understand the 861 patent’s “trigger mechanism” as including the trigger and the downstream components which communicated contact with the target to the components activating the drive mechanism. Although a trigger extending from the housing’s front face suggested a mechanical device, it was also consistent with a pressure sensor or electrical push button.

   The specification deliberately distinguished direct from indirect action and described a hydraulic link as an example of other means. It therefore pointed away from a purely mechanical limitation. Nor was there a tenable intermediate construction confined to mechanical and hydraulic arrangements. The claim covered other means of communicating contact with the target to the drive mechanism. On the parties’ agreed consequences, claims 1 and 3 of patent 861 were invalid.

4. The phrase “means for detachable connection” in patent 576 was functional. It required the relevant means to be on the clearance appliance but was neutral about their construction and about where detachment was controlled. It extended to a feature adapted to permit the remotely operated vehicle to grip and release the appliance. It did not extend to every feature which happened to be capable of being gripped without being adapted for that purpose.

5. On that wider construction, the judge’s conclusion that claims 1 and 2 of patent 576 were obvious over the BAe prior art was upheld. It was unnecessary to decide whether the judge could properly have found obviousness upon his intermediate construction.

6. The effect of the equivalents analysis in Actavis v Lilly [2017] UKSC 48 upon the scope of a claim when validity is in issue was left open because Saab disclaimed reliance upon equivalence.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): In [2017] EWCA Civ 2175, allowed Saab’s appeal concerning patent 861 and dismissed Atlas’s appeal concerning patent 576.

2. High Court, Chancery Division, Patents Court: Mann J, in [2015] EWHC 3163 (Pat), held claims 1 and 2 of patent 576 invalid for obviousness. He otherwise rejected the validity challenges and found infringement of the claims which he held valid.