Facts
The Swiss watch spring factory SA filed a patent application for a motor spring for watch movements, called the Sirius spring. The patent was registered on November 15, 1950. The appellant brought an action against Hermann Hausheer and Nerfos S.à r.l. for nullity of their patents and for infringement of patent no. 271693. The Neuchâtel Cantonal Court annulled patents nos. 303 345 and 305 163 registered in the name of Hausheer as well as patent no. 271 693 registered in the name of the applicant.
The Swiss watch spring factory SA has appealed to the Federal Court against this judgment. It requests that the judgment be confirmed insofar as it annulled patents nos. 303 345 and 305 163 and it reiterates for the rest the conclusions it formulated in the cantonal proceedings.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the question of whether the disputed patent meets the conditions to be considered an invention. It found that the patent claim does not clearly define the invention and that the elements indicated in the claim are not new.
The Federal Court also examined the question of whether the invention proceeds from a creative idea and achieves technical progress. It found that the creative idea must go beyond what was within the reach of a skilled person with good training and that technical progress must be clearly demonstrated. However, it is not necessary for technical progress to be essential.
The Federal Court concluded that the disputed patent does not meet the conditions to be considered an invention and that the…