IAI subsidiary loses patent fight over secure smartphone technology
Elta’s patent for upgrading commercial smartphones for classified military use has been revoked after a challenge by High-Sec. The adjudicator concluded that combining previously known components did not qualify for patent protection.
Following a six-year legal battle, the Patent Authority at Israel’s Ministry of Justice has revoked a cybersecurity patent held by Elta Systems, a subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). The patent covered a system designed to secure classified smartphones used by military and security personnel. It was invalidated following a challenge by High-Sec Labs, a Caesarea-based company controlled and managed by Roni and Aviv Soffer.
Elta informed the Tel Aviv District Court two days ago that it intends to appeal the decision. The revocation could affect Elta’s revenue, although the potential financial impact remains unclear.
According to the Patent Authority’s ruling, the patent, revoked at the end of August, covered a “modem and methods for ‘upgrading’ the security of a legacy personal wireless communication device, such as a commercial smartphone.” The system uses an external device physically connected to the handset to enhance security by neutralizing or disabling at least one of the wireless communication channels built into an off-the-shelf device.
The system is designed to prevent a handset from receiving external communications through unsecured channels, reducing the risk of hacking or unauthorized takeover. Users can switch between communication over an external network and a secure internal network at the press of a button, moving from ordinary civilian communications to secure communications during military operations or wartime.
The legal dispute began in August 2019, when Elta petitioned the Haifa District Court for a temporary injunction against High-Sec, alleging patent infringement. In April 2020, the court stayed the proceedings pending a decision by the Patent Authority on High-Sec’s application to revoke the patent.
High-Sec argued that Elta was seeking exclusive rights over technology that was already widely known and used.
“Elta is attempting to claim a monopoly over technological systems and solutions that already existed and were well-known,” the company argued in its revocation application. “The concept of ‘upgrading’ an existing mobile device by connecting an external modem to it, while disabling its original communication channels, has already been widely implemented by militaries worldwide for the purpose of secure communication.”
High-Sec also contended that disabling a device’s communication channels was not, in itself, a patentable invention, but rather a standard regulatory requirement imposed by defense agencies to separate civilian and defense communications on the battlefield.
The company presented testimony from Lt. Col. (Res.) Ehud Kauf, a former officer in the IDF’s C4I Corps and former CEO of CTI. In an affidavit submitted during the proceedings, Kauf said he had led the integration of commercially available civilian devices for tactical military use.
Elta, by contrast, maintained that its patent was innovative and non-obvious. The company argued that none of the civilian solutions presented during the proceedings enabled the irreversible neutralization of hardware. It also rejected the contention that the patent merely facilitated compliance with basic regulatory requirements or mandatory security standards imposed by defense agencies.
Yaakov Klein, an electrical and electronics engineer and former technical officer in the Signal Corps, testified on Elta’s behalf. Klein had previously managed the transmitters division at Elisra and the project development division at Motorola.
In her decision to revoke the patent, intellectual property adjudicator Dr. Roya Israeli concluded that its key elements were already established in prior art.
“All the components of the patent, the external security add-on, the auxiliary cellular modem, the disabling of communication channels within the existing device, and deactivation via software or neutralization via hardware, were already known,” Israeli wrote.
“These components are mentioned in the prior art for the same purpose as the patent in question, upgrading the security of an existing device to enable communication within a classified environment. The combination of these known components does not constitute a new use; the invention adds nothing to the prior art and is, therefore, not eligible for patent protection.”
IAI defended its broader record of innovation in response to the decision.
“Israel Aerospace Industries is one of the leading companies in the country, and the leader among defense industries, in registering patents that contribute to the security of the State of Israel,” the company said. “The company continues to advance and develop the most sophisticated technologies in the world.”
