Topics: Art. 56 EPC
-
CD Munich, April 8, 2026, Decision, UPC_CFI_280/2025
A realistic starting point in the same technical field does not automatically render the claimed invention obvious (Art. 56 EPC, Art. 65(1)–(2) UPCA).: Even if prior art qualifies as a realistic starting point, it remains relevant for the inventive step assessment that it relates to a different kind of device and solves a different problem…
4 min Reading time→ -
Central Division (Munich), February 24, 2026, Decision, UPC_CFI_829/2024
Patentees must draft precise numerical ranges in composition claims; unclear bases risk added matter (Art. 65(1),(2) UPCA; Art. 138(1)(c) EPC).: The Court construed the coposition as claimed in claim 1 of the Patent as comprising a range of marker molecule calculated in respect of the total sugar composition, while the application disclosed that the amounts…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Court of Appeal, December 29, 2025, decision on revocation action, UPC_CoA_71/2025
Accuracy of translation to be checked at an early stage: The Appellant argued that a translation of a Korean prior art document filed by the Respondent in first instance was incorrect and at best inaccurate and filed own translations on appeal. The CoA holds that these translations are late filed and shall be disregarded. Given…
9 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, April 4, 2025, Decision on infringement and counterclaim for revocation, UPC_CFI_501/2023
Jurisdiction over multiple defendants with commercial relationship and same infringement (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA).: Multiple defendants can be sued at the domicile, principal place of business, or place of business of one defendant if they have a commercial relationship and the action concerns the same alleged infringement (“anchor-defendant”). Headnote 1 of the decision clarifies: In the…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, December 11, 2024, Decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_395/2023
Headnote 1: Order pursuant to R. 36 RoP does not authorize to raise new grounds; UPC procedure is front-loaded system.: The order pursuant to Rule 36 RoP issued by the judge-rapporteur relates to adding some arguments to the debate related to some specific terms regarding claim interpretation, but it did not authorise the defendant to raise a new…
5 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.