Ex-parte order for inspection and preservation of evidence granted. (Article 60 UPCA, Rule 192 ,196 RoP). It is possible that the product "InverJet," as exhibited at the Aquanale trade fair in Cologne, makes use of the technical teaching of the patent.  (Art. 60 (1) EPC).  The applicant has referred to photographs...

Claim Interpretation main claim (Article 69 EPC).  If a dependent claim is only adding an additional feature that does not provide a more specific description of the features of the main claim, it generally argues against the possibility of drawing conclusions about the interpretation of the main claim from this...

General principles regarding inventive step (Article 56 EPC). Different approaches for assessing inventive step, like the problem-solution-approach or a more holistic approach,  are merely guidelines to assist in the establishment of inventive step […] that, when properly applied, should and generally do lead to the...

Like a claimant an appellant may also apply to withdraw an appeal (R. 265.1 RoP). Interest of an intervening party is not relevant. The intervener's appeal in this case is inadmissible pursuant to R. 360 RoP. If the intervener is prevented by the withdrawal of the main party's appeal from the scope of its appeal from...

Preliminary injunction set aside (Article 25 UPCA, Article 62 UPCA). More likely than not that the nonconductive fluid under feature 1.2 is not reproduced by the attacked embodiment. STEROS has failed to demonstrate that the attacked embodiment, namely the electropolishing medium EF 16-11 with solid particles, contains...

Relevance of the determination of the applicable law (Article 24 UPCA). With respect to infringements that have taken place or at least begun before the 1 June 2023, the different approaches outlined above will often lead to the same result, especially if/when the UPC – based on the extensive harmonisation – presumes...

The journalist published on the website of the online daily newspaper Gândul an article entitled ‘An original message from a teacher for parents who are thinking of giving her gifts at the start of the school year’. In the standfirst, the entire text published by the applicant in the main proceedings was reproduced...

Conditions for the protection of a design – Novelty – Individual character – Visual characteristics predetermined by a third party – Freedom of the designer in developing the design – Concept of ‘informed user’ – Influence of features linked to fashion trends. The owner or designer is not required to demonstrate that a...

Patents valid (Article 65 UPCA) but not infringed (Article 25 UPCA).Claim Interpretation (Article 69 EPC, Interpretation Protocol). Feature 1(h): No literal infringement: It follows from the strict, literal wording of the claim that the term “non-overlapping” is to be interpreted as not allowing any kind of overlap...

Subsequent requests for amendment of the patent rejected. (Rule 30(2) RoP). Application not sufficient to enable court’s to exercise discretion. Plaintiff's reasoning limited to general statements.The Plaintiff did not establish a connection between the amendments made in the auxiliary motions and specific arguments...

Application for suspensive effect appeal unfounded (R. 223 RoP, Article 74 UPCA). Lepu has failed to demonstrate that the Hamburg Local Division’s findings and considerations constitute manifest errors, i.e. factual findings or legal considerations that are clearly untenable even on the basis of a summary assessment...

Preliminary injunction granted (Article 62(1) UPCA). Sufficient proof of threat of imminent infringement with medical device (R. 206.2(c) RoP): by obtaining (and publicly announcing) CE-mark approval for the attacked embodiments after the necessary clinical evaluation, providing “ordering information” and announcing to...

Application for suspensive effect of order to communicate information unfounded (R. 223 RoP, Article 74 UPCA, Article 67 UPCA). Communication of information belongs to measures that, when so ordered, are necessary to ensure a high level of protection. It is thus only under exceptional circumstances that the enforcement...

(in)direct patent infringement (Article 25 UPCA); Revocation dismissed (Article 65 UPCA). Counterclaim for declaration of non-infringement inadmissible in the absence of a prior assertion of infringement with respect to Product 2. Such assertion may not be deduced from the mere fact that the patent was invoked with...

EU law does not preclude national rules requiring all co-authors to be involved in a copyright action, provided that the procedure is not unnecessarily complex or costly and does not make it impossible or excessively difficult for one or more co-authors to litigate. The court must always safeguard the right to...

Security for costs already awarded in Milan LD cost decision for an amount of € 77,064.65 dismissed (Article 69(4) UPCA, R.158 RoP). The fact that, following this award of costs, Oerlikon has not yet received the corresponding payment is a matter of enforcement of the Costs decision, and does not justify a request for...

Trade mark liable to mislead the public as a result of the use made of it. Trade mark corresponding to the name of a fashion designer. Assignment of the trade mark. Use of the trade mark in such a way as to make the public actually believe that the designer is still involved in the design of the goods bearing the trade...

Order for the payment of € 100.000 set aside for lack of legal basis (R. 354.4 RoP). Any order for the payment of a penalty sum due to the non-compliance of any order, requires a prior order in which the order that has not been complied with was reinforced with the possibility of a penalty payment. Such a penalty order...

Trade marks mentioning a fanciful year. Year of establishment. Luxury leather goods such as handbags. Trade marks allegedly deceiving the public as to the year of establishment of their proprietor. Conclusie AG: No ground for invalidity.

Added matter (Article 138(1)(c) EPC, Article 123(2) EPC, Article 153(4) EPC). The court may, ex officio, find that the skilled person cannot derive a corresponding disclosure from the earlier application. This finding must be determined on the basis of the skilled person's understanding when reading the earlier...