Wednesday, 19 Feb 2020 12:06 GMT

Fujifilm patent battle reinstated in court

Fujifilm Specialty Ink Systems (FSIS) has had the result of its infringement battle with Nazdar confirmed two years on, as well as its UV ink patents upheld.

The Düsseldorf Appeal Court has confirmed FSIS’ court case against Nazdar for the infringement of its ink patents, after two years. 

As of January 14th, 2020, the Federal Patent Court also rejected Nazdar’s appeal against its infringement of FSIS’ inks and has fully upheld the existing patents.

Rob Fassam, research and development director at Fujifilm Specialty Ink Systems comments: “I am delighted that the Higher Regional Court in Düsseldorf has confirmed our position and the first instance judgement. This sends a clear message to anyone thinking of infringing our intellectual property”.

I am delighted that the Higher Regional Court in Düsseldorf has confirmed our position and the first instance judgement

FSIS first filed suit against Nazdar US, Nazdar UK, and its German distributor, Zaro, through the Regional Court Düsseldorf in 2017.

The companies were accused of infringing FSIS’ UV ink patents (EP 1 803 784 B3 and EP 2 383 314 B3) through the sale of its 702 & 703 UV inkjet series of ink claiming to be chemically compatible with the original inks for Canon Océ Arizona and Fujifilm Acuity printers.

The Regional Court of Düsseldorf issued injunctions against Nazdar and Zaro and as a result the firms changed the chemical components of the inks in question. Despite this, the inks were still marketed under the same name with no indication that any change had been made.

We will continue to protect our investment by filing patents that cover our technology and will take appropriate action against those who infringe

On November 14th, 2019, FSIS received further backing from the courts with the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf confirming the first instance judgement. This means Nazdar and Zaro remain unable to offer any “patent infringing” UV inkjet inks in the future.

In addition to this, the Appeal Court has upheld the original decision that a change in chemical composition of the 702 & 703 series is “not sufficient to avoid infringement” should Nazdar continue to market these inks without “sufficient” indication of product change.

Fassam adds: “We invest significant time and resource developing new and exciting technology that benefits the inkjet industry. We will continue to protect our investment by filing patents that cover our technology and will take appropriate action against those who infringe.”



If you have an interesting story or a view on this news, then please e-mail news@printmonthly.co.uk

Follow Carys on:
 Jo Golding's Twitter Profile