Imagine that a machine manufacturer is faced with a lawsuit filed by a third party alleging patent infringement, unfair competition, and misuse of technology. The plaintiffs seek an injunction prohibiting sales and the payment of substantial damages.
What many people think: “If the plaintiffs have a patent granted by the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (INPI), the cause is lost and we will be forced to stop production.”
In practice, this is not the case.
Specialized legal expertise and an analysis of the technological history make it possible to assess the actual validity of the patent with the INPI, demonstrating, for example:
- That the technology was already part of the state of the art (publicly disclosed before the patent application);
- The absence of infringement, as established by expert examination showing that the company uses different mechanical mechanisms;
- The invalidity of the patent before the INPI due to lack of novelty and inventive step;
- The loss of the plaintiffs’ exclusive rights due to the retroactive effects of the invalidity.
With proper legal grounds, the dispute can be turned around. As an example, in a recent case, the technical analysis led to the invalidation of the plaintiff’s patent and a complete victory for the defendant.
- The conflict: inventors sued a manufacturer, alleging the copying of a patent-protected agricultural mechanism and seeking an injunction against sales and damages.
- The Defense and Expert Examination: The defense demonstrated that the technology already existed in an international piece of equipment disclosed years earlier. The technical expert examination confirmed that the defendant did not even use the only element that the INPI considered “new” and instead employed a different system.
- Proceedings before the INPI: At the same time, the defense’s request for invalidity led the INPI to invalidate the patent for lack of novelty and inventive step.