Hard materials, hard times …

Case No. O2016_001 ¦ Main Hearing of 3 May 2018


This case started off already on 27 February 2016, between Harcane Sàrl and Comadur. There is not much known about the plaintiff, but the defendant is a company of the Swatch Group, specialising in hard materials. Noteworthy, the owner of Harcane Sàrl, Rui Carolla, apparently had spent part of his career with Comadur; see SHAB.

Quite some background information was already included in the official announcement of the hearing. The plaintiff in first place requests that CH 707 572 B1, concerning a binder for an injection molding composition, be declared null and void. As an auxiliary measure, it is requested that the patent be assigned to the plaintiff. Allegedly, the patent lacks novelty over US 5,266,264, several PhD theses and the sale of a certain “feedstock” including the patented binder. The defendant had allegedly been provided with it back in November 2012. Further, the plaintiff alleges that the mixture according to CH 707 572 B1 had in fact been invented by Mr. Lestarquit, who was at the time an employee of the Plaintiff.

The defendant holds the view that the claimed subject-matter is new and inventive. All the compositions had been developed by Mr. Cartier, an employee of the defendant since 1999. The “mix sheets” developed by Mr. Cartier allegedly have only been put into practice by employees of the plaintiff, including Mr. Lestarquit. The defendant thus requests that the case should be dismissed in its entirety.

In the hearing, the alleged obviousness of CH 707 572 B1 was intensely discussed. Both parties had identified the characterizing part of claim 1 as the distinguishing feature, but proposed (opposing) problem-and-solution approaches (EPO Guidelines, G-VII, 5). The expert opinion of the judge-rapporteur had apparently been in favor of the plaintiff. Further, it was discussed whether the feedstock that had been exchanged between the parties during the collaboration had become public / is part of the prior art.

Initially, the defendant had no interest in settlement discussions, in view of some parallel proceedings elsewhere. Rather, the defendant requested that the present proceedings be stayed until after such parallel proceedings are concluded. Still, the defendant finally agreed to enter into settlement discussions as a first step.

Note that CH 707 572 B1 (filed 15 July 2013) has no further family members. However, we came across patent family WO 2014/191304 A1, claiming priority of CH 01021/13, filed 28 May 2013 and published as CH 708 097 A2, which is pretty similar to the patent in suit. It remains to be seen how all this will be sorted out.

Reported by Ingo LUMMER and Martin WILMING


Case No. O2016_001 ¦ Main Hearing of 3 May 2018

Harcane Sàrl


Comadur SA


    • Dr. Mark SCHWEIZER
    • Dr. Tobias BREMI
    • Dr. Michael STÖRZBBACH
    • Dr. Regula RÜEDI
    • Dr. Thomas LEGLER


    • Dr. Tobias BREMI

Court Clerk:

    • Agnieszka TABERSKA

Representative(s) of Plaintiff:

    • Jean-Claude SCHWEIZER (SLB)

Representative(s) of Defendant:

    • Dr. Nathalie TISSOT (Tissot)


Fullscreen view (new tab)


Fullscreen view (new tab)


Enter your name and email address below to get notified of new posts by email.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One Reply to “Hard materials, hard times …”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.