Topics: claim interpretation
-
LD The Hague, August 29, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_684/2024
Claim interpretation: Feature 1.6 of claim 1 in the patent-in-suit (EP 1651838) was central to both infringement and validity. The dispute between the parties concerned, inter alia, the meaning of the wording “turning movements” in feature 1.6. The opposing views: o City Glass: “Turning movement” means an actual rotation (not just a torque). o Maars:…
2 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, July 28, 2025, decision in revocation action, UPC_CFI_239/2024
Claim construction: While terms used in patent documents should be given their normal meaning in the relevant art, the description and the drawings, when considered in the context of document’s contents and not in isolation, may give these terms a different meaning. In the case at hand, the Court affirmed, applying this principle, that according…
2 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Munich, June 6, 2025, decision, UPC_CFI_324/2024, UPC_CFI_487/2024
Burden of proof for non-infringement: If the defendant claims that infringement is impossible due to factors outside the scope of the patent claim, the defendant must prove this. The claimant does not need to address such external factors. In the decision, the defendant unsuccessfully argued that infringement was impossible due to the design of existing…
5 min Reading time→ -
UPC Court of Appeal, Order of April 30, 2025, UPC_CoA_768/2024
Claim construction principles: The interpretation of a patent claim is a matter of law. Therefore, the Court cannot leave the judicial task of interpreting the patent claim to an expert but has to construe the claim independently. The skilled person is a notional entity that cannot be equated with any real person in the technical…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, 2 April 2025, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_359/2023
Strict Application Principle for Amending Patents in Defense Against Revocation: Art. 76 (1) UPCA contains a strict application principle. Accordingly, a patent proprietor, who wishes to defend its patent in a limited version, has to submit a clear and comprehensive Application to amend the patent. This includes situations where the proprietor wishes to rely on…
3 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, February 14, 2025, order on request for provisional measures, UPC_CoA_382/2024
Claim construction regarding means-plus-function features.: Means-plus-function features must be understood as any feature suitable for carrying out the function (headnote 1, para. 47). Added matter assessment.: General provisions: The Court must ascertain what the skilled person would derive directly and unambiguously using their common general knowledge and seen objectively and relative to the date of…
7 min Reading time→ -
LD Hamburg, February 19, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_58/2024
Interpretation of Claims: When interpreting a claim, in addition to its wording, the application instructions and express disclosures in the description of the patent specification must be taken into account (headnote 2). Division LD Hamburg UPC number UPC_CFI_58/2024 Type of proceedings Infringement proceedings (and counterclaim for revocation) Parties Claimant: Lionra Technologies Ltd. Defendants: Cisco Systems…
1 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, January 17, 2025, decision in first instance on validity, UPC_CFI_316/2023
“Generous standard” with regard to late-filed facts and evidence: While the front-loaded approach of the UPC system requires the parties so submit facts and evidence relied on as early as possible, a generous standard is to be applied with regard to submissions in a Reply to a Statement of Defence. A Claimant is allowed to…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD The Hague, November 22, 2024, Decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_239/2023
Assessment of the scope of protection in infringement cases in two steps: (i) literal infringement; (ii) infringement by equivalence: The UPCA contains no provision on the infringement by equivalence, however, Art. 2 of the Protocol to Art. 69 EPC makes clear that equivalence must be considered: “For the purpose of determining the extent of protection…
6 min Reading time→ -
CD Paris, November 5, 2024, Revocation action, UPC_CFI_309/2023
R. 30 (1) (c) RoP does not set out the consequence that all amendments proposed (auxiliary requests) should be dismissed en bloc as not meeting the criterion of being reasonable in number.: Only some of the proposed auxiliary requests may be admitted. The Court can limit a patent by an amendment of the claims and…
7 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, October 31, 2024, Decision, UPC_CFI_373/2023
Preferred Embodiments Not Limiting for Claims: The claim must not be limited to the scope of preferred embodiments. The scope of a claim extends to subject-matter that the skilled person understands as the patentee’s claim after interpretation using the description and drawings. A claim interpretation which is supported by the description and drawings as a…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, September 6, 2024, order of the court of first instance, UPC_CFI_165/2024 and UPC_CFI_166/2024
Existence of infringement is assessed on the basis of UPC law without recourse to national patent law: Art. 25 UPCA (right to prevent the direct use of the invention) constitutes uniform substantive law and Art. 62 (1) UPCA (provisional and protective measures) uniform procedural law, which takes precedence over national patent laws so that these…
11 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→ -
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…
4 min Reading time→ -
Court of Appeal, February 26, 2024, order on provisional measures, UPC_CoA_335/2023
The patent claim is not only the starting point, but the decisive basis for determining the scope of protection of an EP under Art. 69 EPC in conjunction with the Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69 EPC: The interpretation of a patent claim does not depend solely on the strict, literal meaning of the…
5 min Reading time→ -
CoA Luxembourg, May 13, 2024, order on provisional measures, UPC_CoA_1/2024
The CoA confirmed its standards for the claim construction as stated in the order of CoA of February 26, 2024, UPC_CoA_335/2023: The patent claim is not only the starting point but also a decisive basis for determining the scope of protection of the European Patent. The interpretation of a patent claim does not depend solely…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.