Shampoo and conditioner products’ specialist, Head & Shoulders have accused a rival company of patent infringement. The infringement allegations regard the company’s anti-dandruff methods – WIPR reports.
Source: Best anti-dandruff shampoo
Procter & Gamble (P&G) sues Unilever claiming that it infringes three of its patents with their numerous anti-dandruff and scalp therapy products.
The case was filed on October 10 at the US District Court, Southern District of Ohio, fairly close to P&G’s basis. An extensive list has been outlined by P&G with allegations about the infringement of their products by Unilever.
Richard Beem, patent attorney at Beem Patent Law in Chicago found that P&G seems to blanket the anti-dandruff market and he also pointed out that the scope of the claims is quite broad in this case.
P&G refers to an agreement between the two companies concluded in 1998 and accuses Unilever of breaking it. The deal outlines a guideline on how to deal with disputes. Negotiations, mediation and, as a last step, arbitration are proposed to use instead of legal proceedings.
However, according to P&G, Unilever has “repudiated” the contract’s terms and conditions by refusing to arbitrate and instead, challenging the validity of the patents and filing at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The complaint also claims that Unilever began three adversarial proceedings challenging the validity of P&G’s patents.
May Unilever challenge the good faith of P&G in filing the lawsuit, but P&G abide to the terms outlined in the term sheet and asked for negotiations as far as Beem’s thoughts go through his mind about the case.
P&G is calling the court to restore damages and an injunction on the patents.
“Unilever will most likely ask for a delay of the case because of the invalidity challenge.
In case of USPTO strikes down the patent and determine claims as invalid then the case will likely be dismissed.”
Georg Pintz & Partners LLC