Key takeaways
A separation of proceedings according to R. 302.1 RoP is sensible and appropriate when dealing with a plurality of patents.
✓
The two patents-in-suit may be attacked in respective nullity proceedings which may result in differing timelines of the proceedings. A separation of proceedings should therefore be ordered at an early stage.
There is no need for a separation of proceedings according to R. 303.2 RoP in case of a plurality of defendants but the same attacked embodiment.
✓
Synergy effects in claim construction and infringement issues should be acknowledged and utilised.
Submissions on the provisionally determined value in dispute can still be filed after the separation of the proceedings, provided that this has been reserved.
✓
The original proceedings remain decisive for the time of the pendency of the separated proceedings and the service of the Statement of Claim.
✓
Division
Local Division Düsseldorf
UPC number
UPC_CFI_363/2023
Type of proceedings
Infringement action
Parties
Claimant: Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.
Defendants: 1. expert e-Commerce GmbH 2. expert klein GmbH
Patent(s)
EP 3 926 698 B1
EP 3 223 320 B1
Body of legislation / Rules
R. 302.1 RoP
R. 302.2 RoP
R. 303.2 RoP
