Topics: Art. 63 UPCA
-
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 Düsseldorf, April 10, 2025, Decision on infringement, UPC_CFI_50/2024
Claim Interpretation of Product-by-Process Claims : Product-by-process claims should be interpreted based on the technical features imparted to the product by the process, not the process itself (Art. 69 EPC, Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69 EPC). The court held that the key feature in this case was the ability to create a structural…
5 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Munich, December 18, 2024, withdrawal of opt-out, exhaustion, and FRAND defense, UPC_CFI_9/2023
Withdrawal of opt-out effective if CMS workflow is used: The Court held that Claimant’s withdrawal of the opt-out was effective as Claimant used the online workflow in the Case Management System (CMS) according to Rule 5.7 RoP. It is not mandatory to use the provided template which is merely a non-binding support tool. The withdrawal…
6 min Reading time→ -
LD Milan, November 4, 2024, decision, UPC_CFI_241/2023
No stay of proceedings due to parallel counterclaim for revocation: There is no basis for a stay (R. 295(m) RoP) of an infringement action, where the defendant has acknowledged the validity of the patent and infringement without exception, for the purpose of awaiting the Court’s decision on the counterclaim for revocation introduced in a parallel…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, October 29, 2024, order, UPC_CoA_549/2024
Order on suspensive effect of appeal if impugned decision is evidently incorrect.: The suspensive effect may be ordered in particular if the order against which the appeal is directed is evidently incorrect. Whether there is an evident violation of the law is assessed on the basis of the factual findings and legal considerations that provide…
4 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.