James Mellor QC and Michael Conway represented Conversant and Charlotte May QC and Lindsay Lane QC appeared for Apple in this trial relating to patent infringement and validity which was heard before Birss J. The patent in question (as unconditionally amended) related to a particular user interface for a “smart phone”. It was said to be infringed by various models of Apple’s iPhone running various versions of its iOS operating system. In particular, the infringement related to functionality on the iPhone known as “Widgets” and “Home Screen Quick Actions”.
Apple argued that the patent was invalid due to obviousness, based on two items of prior art (an extract from a book called “Windows 98 for Dummies” and the manual for a product called the IBM Simon); AgrEvo obviousness and points on added matter. The Judge held that the patent would have been infringed if it was valid, but that it was invalid based on the IBM Simon prior art. The other invalidity arguments failed. The judgment deals with the identity of the skilled person and particularly whether this can be different for amended and unamended claims.