GLOCK Defeat SIG SAUER Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Patent Infringement Case

U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- GLOCK refers to media reports discussing pending patent litigation between SIG Sauer, Inc. and GLOCK GmbH.

In January 2018, SIG Sauer, Inc. (SIG) filed a patent infringement suit together with a motion for a preliminary injunction against Glock GmbH (GLOCK Austria) in the Commercial Court Vienna, Austria.

SIG´s motion requested the court to prevent GLOCK from manufacturing and selling some of its most popular pistol models. SIG´s motion for a preliminary injunction was dismissed by the court because GLOCK successfully proved that SIG´s patent is invalid. SIG did not appeal this important ruling, so it is a final decision.

The remaining case in the Commercial Court Vienna has currently stayed because GLOCK filed a motion for a declaration of invalidity of the disputed patent with the Austrian Patent Office in April 2018.

It is highly likely that the Patent Office will grant GLOCK´s motion and declare the disputed SIG patent null and void because GLOCK proved during the preliminary injunction court proceeding that the SIG patent is invalid.

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/...nt-infringement-case

On another site it mentioned it was about some breechblock patent SIG thought they had.

Probably just the lawyers looking for some more billable time.

The article is wrong. At this stage of the litigation, SIG asked the Court for a preliminary injunction to prevent Glock from manufacturing and selling Gen 5 and 19X pistols while the case is pending. The Court declined to do so, but did suspended the case while the Patent Office evaluates the patent. In short, the there has been no legal conclusion as to whether the patent is valid or whether Glock breached it. See https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/...g-sauer-over-america

At the heart of it is a patent for an ambi slide catch. Now having a lever on the opposite side isn't that novel. What SIG is claiming the patent on is cutouts on both sides of the slide for the lever to catch on. Most ambi slide catches just have the lever on the right that operates the left side. But now Glock has the notches on both sides of the slide, so either side can lock the slide back, instead of only the left side.

If you ask me, it's a frivolous patent, and a frivolous suit. But if SIG does hold a valid, novel patent, I think all Glock would have to do is round the back side of the right side slide notch. Then it's just clearance for the catch to move, like the Ruger American or...wait for it...the P320!, not a second catch like SIGs patent.

Why do I think it's a frivolous patent? Well, with a connected slide catch lever, you're really only ever going to engage the slide notch on one side of the slide, the most forward notch or most rearward lever. Unless you get really, really close tolerances, you'll never engage both sides simultaneously. Okay, not never, but it's more work to make happen for no payoff. In fact, the result would likely be a stiffer than usual release, which few would like. It's like a double hook AK trigger. I'm kinda perplexed why Glock would make a catch on both sides.

Anyway, I still don't blame SIG for trying to defend the patent, even if it appears petty on the surface (and may well be petty). But my reasoning is if somehow it's important to a future design and you didn't defend it now, you may lose it for the future.

This is all assuming I understand everything correctly. Which is rare!

Patent infringement protection litigation by SIG? Well at least they should have some experience at that to glean from, given their reversed role against a pissed off LWRC and the 1st gen 516...

Probably will go after FNH and the 509 next, if the Patent Office gets stupid and actually thinks that the 'ambi' notch is worthy of awarding a patent for.

Lawyers gonna lawyer....

Whatever happened to the suit Steyr had over the pistol frame insert?