Institutions: Central Division
-
CD Paris, July 29, 2024, Decision concerning the revocation action No. ACT_555899/2023, UPC_CFI_263/2023
Admissibility of defense with non-attacked claims: The request to amend the patent which concerns both claims challenged by the revocation action and claims not challenged by it is inadmissible (only) with regard to these latter claims. Defense with features from non-attacked claims admissible: In a situation in which the patent is not entirely attacked, the…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 30, 2024, order on confidentiality, UPC_CFI_367/2023
Access to cost breakdown for adversary granted: In the context of an interpretation in conformity with European law taking into account Art. 9(2) of Directive (EU) 2016/943, Art. 58 UPCA, must be understood to mean that the circle of persons entitled to access to confidential information must include at least one natural person from each…
4 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Central Division, Paris Seat, 19 July 2024, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_255/2023
Concurrent pendency of invalidity proceedings before different divisions and criteria for exercising the Court’s discretion, Art. 33 (3) UPCA: In the situation of concurrently pending invalidity attacks by different parties against the same patent before different divisions (here: revocation action before CD and counterclaim(s) for revocation before LD) the local division has a discretion either…
8 min Reading time→ -
CD Munich, 23 July, 2023, Order on conclusion of a revocation action by way of settlement, UPC 75/2023, UPC 80/2023
Conclusion of an action by way of settlement without a request according to R. 365.1 RoP possible: The parties may at any time conclude their action by way of settlement which “shall” be confirmed by a decision of the Court, Art. 79 UPCA. R. 365 RoP clarifies that the Court shall confirm the settlement only…
3 min Reading time→ -
Central division (Section Munich), Decision in Revocation Action, UPC 1/2023, UPC 14/2023
Claim interpretation: When interpreting a patent claim, the person skilled in the art does not apply a philological understanding, but determines the technical meaning of the terms used with the aid of the description and the drawings. A feature in a patent claim is always to be interpreted in light of the claim as a…
5 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 2, 2024, order on party’s representation, UPC_CFI_164/2024
The possible violation of the obligation to act as an independent counsellor cannot be asserted by the opposing party, but only by the party for whose benefit such an obligation is placed.: Opposing party has no interest in such a finding as the effectiveness of a party’s right to defence in court shall be protected.…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 2, 2024, order on CMS workflows in revocation action, UPC_CFI_484/2023
Whenever certain workflows are provided, parties shall use the correct workflows for lodging documents. : If there is a separate workflow for the Application to amend the patent, the party should use this workflow instead of filing the Application in the same submission as the Statement of Defense. This makes the CMS more transparent and…
3 min Reading time→ -
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…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, Preliminary objection of a revocation action, May 2, 2024, UPC_CFI-484/2023
The UPC has jurisdiction for the central revocation action even if a prior national revocation action is pending: The asserted patent is only validated in Germany. In 2021, Nokia Solutions and Networks GmbH & Co. KG filed a national revocation action with the German Federal Patent Court (GFPC) against the proprietor (Mala Technologies), which was…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, May 10, 2024, request for simultaneous interpretation, UPC_CFI_367_2023
As long as some of the party’s representatives speak/understand the language of the proceedings, there is no reason for simultaneous interpretation of the oral hearing pursuant to R. 109 (1), (2) sentence 1 RoP, whereby the costs arising from the simultaneous interpretation are procedural costs: It does not matter what language skills a specific representative…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, May 10, 2024, Order re Preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_589997/2023
The violation of a standstill agreement does not constitute grounds for challenging the jurisdiction of the Unified Patent Court: Lack of jurisdiction can occur when a different court or a different body (as an arbitration board) which is part of a different judicial system have the power to address the dispute (‘relative’ lack of jurisdiction)…
2 min Reading time→ -
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…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, February 27, 2024, late-filed amendments to the patent (rejected), UPC_CFI_255-2023CD
Alignment of defenses in different proceedings: In a case in which the patent proprietor applied to amend the patent in due time (that is, within the time period for lodging the defence to revocation) and then requested a change of this original application within his next deadline (rejoinder to the reply to the defence and…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Munich, 27 February 2024, order to combine cases in revocation actions, UPC_CFI_1/2023, UPC_CFI_14/2023
Counterclaim for revocation can be combined with central revocation action against the same patent upon request by the parties: The parties agreed that the counterclaim for revocation pending at LD Munich should be dealt with together with an earlier filed and considerably further advanced central revocation action pending at the CD. The LD Munich thus…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Munich, 31 January 2024, Order 103 RoP / 105.5 RoP, UPC_CFI_252/2024
Admissibility of auxiliary requests: Claimant requested to limit the submission of auxiliary requests for the further course of proceedings. The court does not see a legal basis for pre-emptively and categorially ruling out the submission of any further auxiliary requests. Nor does the Court see any legal basis to order the Defendant to make the…
3 min Reading time→ -
CD Munich, December 28, 2023, Preliminary Order, UPC_CFI_75/2023
Request under Rule 262.1(b) can be stayed if Court considers the outcome of appeal proceedings in a different case highly likely to be of relevance for the decision: Upon request under Rule 262.1(b) RoP of the Applicant to make available all written pleadings and evidence the Court decided to wait for the outcome of appeal…
2 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, 27 February 2024, order on request to amend the patent, UPC_CFI_255/2023
Request to further “amend the case” or “amend the patent” by defendant in revocation action due to invalidity attacks brought in the parallel counterclaim for revocation was rejected: Defendant in revocation action applied to amend the patent in due time, i.e, within the time period for lodging the defence to revocation. It then requested a…
6 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.