Author: Antje Weise
-
LD Mannheim, June 27, 2024, indicative decision, UPC_CFI_ 210/2023
Arguments on claim construction to be made with the Statement of Claim: According to R. 13(1)(n) RoP in cases of technically complex subject-matters, the Statement of Claim must already contain the claim construction if the patent in suit is not readily understandable on its own. In case the plaintiff does not comply, further legal issues…
-
LD Duesseldorf, June 27, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_457/2023
Deadline Extensions due to R. 242A RoP applications in FRAND proceedings: If the Defendant deals extensively with license negotiations between itself and a patent pool in the context of the substantiation of the FRAND objection raised by it, the Claimant can only respond comprehensively to this argument if he can consult with employees of the…
-
CD Paris, June 26, 2024, order, UPC_CFI_164/2024
Independence of a counsellor is measured with reference to the possible harm to the interests of the party : The fact that the representative of a party is also the inventor of the patent-in-suit, the original applicant of the application underlying the patent-in-suit and the managing director of the first assignee of the patent does…
-
LD Duesseldorf, June 26, 2024, procedual order, UPC_CFI_457/2023
Direct and present interest of the Intervener: The legal interest required for the admissibility of the intervention is given if the Intervener has a direct and present interest in the issuance of the order or decision requested by the assisted party. Such a legal interest can be affirmed if the patent in suit has been…
-
LD Duesseldorf, June 24, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_456/2023
If access to written pleadings is restricted to representatives only according to R. 262A RoP, this is regularly a reason for the extension of time limits: R. 9.3 (a) RoP authorizes the court to extend time limits. However, this option should only be used with caution and only in justified exceptional cases. Such an exceptional…
-
LD The Hague, June 25, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_195/2024
Applicant/Defendant has to bear the cost of simultaneous interpretation in the case of a Polish translation : To effectively meet the requirements of the fundamental right to be heard, it is important to allow parties to use simultaneous interpreter(s) if they deem this necessary to enable them to fully participate in the oral hearing that…
-
CD Paris, April 25, 2024, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI-361/2023
Key Takeaways Neither a Preliminary Objection nor the likelihood of an appeal against its rejection are relevant factors for the stay of the proceedings : Neither the fact that a Preliminary Objection has been lodged nor the likelihood of success of the appeal against the rejection of the Preliminary Objection are relevantfactors for deciding whether…
-
CoA Luxembourg, April 26, 2024, UPC_CoA_500/2023
Time period for lodging an appeal can be extended in case of an excusable error: It is true that the time period for lodging an appeal is a mandatory time limit that cannot be extended (see R. 9.4 RoP) However, an excusable error can, in exceptional circumstances, justify a derogation from that rule. That is…
-
LD Duesseldorf, 26 February 2024, procedural order on language of proceedings, UPC_CoA_335/2023
Applications on change of language require substantiated reasons: The Applicant requested for a change of language from German into English (Art. 49(5) UPCA, R. 322 RoP). It argued that both parties were English speaking companies, that it was an SME and translation costs would be disproportionately disadvantageous for it. Also, this would enable the CoA…
-
CoA Luxembourg, 26 February 2024, procedural order on application to stay, UPC_CoA_3352023
No stay of proceedings if party was declared insolvent after the oral hearing had concluded and the legal dispute was ready for a decision, R. 311.1 RoP, Art. 41 (3) UPCA: A court shall stay the proceedings if a party is declared insolvent, R.311.1. However, the Rules must be interpreted in accordance with Art. 41(3)…
-
CoA Luxembourg, 26 February 2024, order in the proceedings for provisional measures, UPC_CoA_335/2023
Claim Construction: The patent claim – to be interpreted from the point of view of a person skilled in the art – is not only the starting point, but the decisive basis for determining theprotective scope of a European patent under Art. 69 EPC in conjunction with the Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69…