{"id":5964,"date":"2025-11-05T16:35:53","date_gmt":"2025-11-05T16:35:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/?p=5964"},"modified":"2025-11-06T08:03:04","modified_gmt":"2025-11-06T08:03:04","slug":"patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/","title":{"rendered":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong><em>Paris Court of Appeal, Division 5 Chamber 2, 13 June 2025, No. 23\/02588<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong><em>IMPACT: <\/em><\/strong><em>In this ruling, the Paris Court of Appeal addresses the practice of intermediate generalisation, which consists of extracting a specific feature by isolating it from an originally disclosed combination of features, subject to strict constraints.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><em>The Court also penalises, on grounds of disparagement, the patent holder\u2019s publication of an announcement on its website mentioning the filing of an infringement action, even though it was not based on sufficient factual grounds.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong><em>The facts<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The US company Intellectual Ventures LLC (<strong>IV<\/strong>), which specialises in the creation, development, acquisition and exploitation of inventions, is the holder of a European patent entitled \u201cOrganisation of data encryption in a wireless communications system,\u201d designating France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Considering that SFR\u2019s \u201cAuto Connect WiFi\u201d service\u2014which allows subscribers to automatically switch from the mobile network to the SFR WiFi Mobile network using EAP-SIM technology\u2014implemented several claims of the patent, IV obtained, in October 2016, an order for an infringement seizure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Following the execution of the seizure at SFR\u2019s premises, IV brought infringement proceedings against SFR before the Paris Judicial Court in November 2016.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On 3 February 2017, a bailiff\u2019s report recorded that IV had announced the filing of the infringement action in the \u201cnews\u201d section of its website. SFR then filed a counterclaim for disparagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>By a judgment dated 25 October 2022, the Court annulled the claims at issue on the grounds of added subject-matter, dismissed the infringement action and found IV liable for disparagement. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong><em>Invalidity of the patent for \u201cintermediate generalisation\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court first recalled that, pursuant to Article L. 614-12 of the Intellectual Property Code, a European patent designating France may be revoked on one of the grounds set out in Article 138(1) EPC, in particular where the subject-matter of the granted patent extends beyond the content of the application as filed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>To determine whether the subject-matter of the claims extends beyond the content of the original application, the Court referred to the practice known as <em>\u201cintermediate generalisation\u201d<\/em>, which it defined as <em>\u201cthe extraction of a characteristic in isolation from its specific context\u201d<\/em>, that is, detached from a specific embodiment and not closely linked to the other features of that embodiment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Such a generalisation is justified only <em>\u201cin the absence of any clearly recognisable functional or structural relationship between the features of the specific combination\u201d<\/em> or <em>\u201cif the extracted feature is not inextricably linked\u201d<\/em> to those features.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>More specifically, intermediate generalisation is admissible only <em>\u201cif the skilled person can recognise without any doubt, from the application as filed, that the features taken from a detailed embodiment are not closely linked to the other features of that embodiment and that they apply directly and unambiguously to the more general context.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In this case, IV had isolated the feature according to which encryption was performed at the MAC layer of a wireless local area network, while deleting the original reference to the WEP protocol, even though, for the skilled person, these features are closely and functionally linked. The Court therefore found that dissociating them resulted in a claim extending beyond the content of the original application, and confirmed the invalidity of claims 1, 11 and 14 of the French part of the patent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong><em>Public disclosure of the infringement action constituting disparagement<\/em><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>On the basis of Article 1240 of the Civil Code, the Court reiterated that disparagement may be found <em>\u201ceven in the absence of direct and effective competition,\u201d<\/em> where <em>\u201cinformation likely to cast discredit on a marketed product\u201d<\/em> or on an operator is disseminated without sufficient factual basis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In this case, IV had published on its own website, on the very day the writ of summons was served, a notice announcing the filing of an infringement action against SFR before the Paris District Court, using the following wording (here translated into French): <em>\u201cToday, Intellectual Ventures has brought an infringement action against SFR before the court.\u201d<a href=\"#_ftn1\" id=\"_ftnref1\"><strong>[1]<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court emphasised that this publication:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>was accessible to the French public, including SFR\u2019s customers;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>disclosed the existence of an infringement action;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>lacked a sufficient factual basis, as it was based solely on the writ of summons;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>did not relate to a matter of general interest.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Accordingly, the Court held that the publication in question constituted an act of disparagement harming SFR\u2019s image and upheld the order requiring IV to pay \u20ac50,000 in damages, as awarded at first instance, without giving any further detail on how the damages were assessed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><sup><a id=\"_ftn1\" href=\"#_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> <sub>In its original English version: <em>\u201cToday Intellectual Ventures filed a patent infringement complaint against Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Fran\u00e7aise du Radiot\u00e9l\u00e9phone \u2013 SFR before the District Court. \u201d<\/em><\/sub><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Patent-ENG.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of Focus IP.\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-0e8be088-5c09-433c-af04-3df9a3be6112\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Patent-ENG.pdf\">Focus IP<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/Patent-ENG.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-0e8be088-5c09-433c-af04-3df9a3be6112\">T\u00e9l\u00e9charger<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Paris Court of Appeal, Division 5 Chamber 2, 13 June 2025, No. 23\/02588 IMPACT: In this ruling, the Paris Court of Appeal addresses the practice of intermediate generalisation, which consists of extracting a specific feature by isolating it from an originally disclosed combination of features, subject to strict constraints. The Court also penalises, on grounds [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5964","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-veille-juridique"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Paris Court of Appeal, Division 5 Chamber 2, 13 June 2025, No. 23\/02588 IMPACT: In this ruling, the Paris Court of Appeal addresses the practice of intermediate generalisation, which consists of extracting a specific feature by isolating it from an originally disclosed combination of features, subject to strict constraints. The Court also penalises, on grounds [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"JP Karsenty\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Karsenty\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Karsenty\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Karsenty\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322\"},\"headline\":\"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\"},\"wordCount\":785,\"articleSection\":[\"Legal watch\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\",\"name\":\"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/\",\"name\":\"JP Karsenty\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322\",\"name\":\"Karsenty\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/520ca91b59595a2eed8650370112443faca59b88c5b8871d8ca2b8b38badbd02?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/520ca91b59595a2eed8650370112443faca59b88c5b8871d8ca2b8b38badbd02?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Karsenty\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty","og_description":"Paris Court of Appeal, Division 5 Chamber 2, 13 June 2025, No. 23\/02588 IMPACT: In this ruling, the Paris Court of Appeal addresses the practice of intermediate generalisation, which consists of extracting a specific feature by isolating it from an originally disclosed combination of features, subject to strict constraints. The Court also penalises, on grounds [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/","og_site_name":"JP Karsenty","article_published_time":"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00","author":"Karsenty","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Karsenty","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/"},"author":{"name":"Karsenty","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322"},"headline":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION","datePublished":"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/"},"wordCount":785,"articleSection":["Legal watch"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/","url":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/","name":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION - JP Karsenty","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-11-05T16:35:53+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-06T08:03:04+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/patents-assessment-practice-intermediate-generalisation\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"PATENTS: PARIS COURT OF APPEAL\u2019S ASSESSMENT OF THE PRACTICE OF INTERMEDIATE GENERALISATION"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/","name":"JP Karsenty","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/5a419e74cf5fd7e5314e1877dac11322","name":"Karsenty","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/520ca91b59595a2eed8650370112443faca59b88c5b8871d8ca2b8b38badbd02?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/520ca91b59595a2eed8650370112443faca59b88c5b8871d8ca2b8b38badbd02?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Karsenty"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5964","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5964"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5964\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5972,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5964\/revisions\/5972"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5964"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5964"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jpkarsenty.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5964"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}