Unredacted version of the expert’s description following an order for inspection and preservation of evidence disclosed to the applicant. (Article 60 UPCA, Rule 196, Rule 194, 199 RoP). Respondent has not asserted confidentiality interests with regard to the information contained in the description provided by the...

Preliminary Injunction granted (Article 62 UPCA, Rule 211 RoP, Rule 209 RoP). The application for provisional measures can be decided on the applicant’s submissions by a regular order in the PI proceedings . If the defendant does not lodge an objection within the time period set by the Court or decides not to...

Withdrawal of infringement proceedings granted with parties’ consensus. Confidentiality pertaining to confidential settlement information maintained.  (Rule 265 RoP , Rule 262.2 RoP)

Patent partially revoked for lack of inventive step , to the extent it covers more than auxiliary request III, with claims 5 and 6 remaining unchanged. (Article 56 EPC, Rule 25 RoP, Rule 30 RoP). There is no lack of clarity in the amended claim 1 in which the numerical value of the angle (40° - 60°) has been changed (A...

Interim costs decision of CD Milan dated 22 July 2025 confirmed as final and binding decision. (Rule 150 RoP, Rule 151 RoP, Article 69 UPCA). Party requesting cost compensation must indicate exactly which cost item it is requesting payment for to allow the judge to carry out the review provided for in Rule 156 RoP  and...

Request to stay proceedings pending EPO opposition rejected. As a general principle, the Court will not stay proceedings, otherwise, the Court cannot ensure that the final oral hearing will take place within a reasonable time. (R. 295 RoP). An exception to the principle that the Court will not stay revocation...

Patent maintained in the form of the third Auxiliary Request (Article 65 UPCA). Appropriate to limit the revocation assessment to a maximum of different documents to challenge the novelty and to argue for non-inventiveness (R. 44 RoP, R. 104 RoP). The Court holds that the attacks not identified by bioMérieux as (most)...

Further exchange of written pleadings allowed (Rule 36 RoP) . Claimant permitted to respond to Defendant’s arguments regarding noninfringement and FRAND.

Patent valid and infringed. (Article 25 UPCA).VALIDITY. Counterclaim for revocation unfounded : No added matter (Article 138 EPC). The Court cannot identify any relevant differences between the new translations of claim 1 (from Japanese) and the application as filed. Even if considering only the pure wording, the...

Exchange of further written pleadings partially allowed. (Rule 36 RoP). Claimant allowed to submit EPO’s preliminary opinion and a summary of the EPO’s reasoning until 21 November 2025. Submission of second test purchase rejected. The claimant does not sufficiently explain why the submission could not have been made...

Withdrawal of request for a discretionary review of order of the Milan LD (R. 220.3 RoP). R. 265 RoP applies to discretionary review requests mutatis mutandis. The withdrawal is permitted after a decision on Alpinestars’ request for a discretionary review became obsolete since the Milan LD, by order of 13 January 2026...

Application for ‘External Eyes Only’ confidentiality club rejected (R. 262A RoP). Inadmissible requests by intervener that do not support SUN PATENT’s appeal and requests (R. 313.2 RoP). Requests which go beyond the scope defined by the Court and beyond the mere support of existing requests are inadmissible. Trade...

Confirmation of registrar’s rejection of application to be entered on the list of representatives on the basis of R. 12.1 EPLC Rules (grandfather’s clause) after expiration of the one-year transitional period (Article 48(3) UPCA, R. 19 EPLC Rules). Neither the EPLC Rules themselves nor the application of said rules by...

Ex parte orders to preserve evidence and for inspection confirmed (R 197.3 RoP. R. 199 RoP). A double assessment determines the scope of review proceedings. First, the Court should assess whether it has “rightly” decided to issue the “ex parte” Order. The Court should then assess whether the Orders are to be confirmed...

No limitation on the use of information received pursuant to a court order to communicate information (Article 67 UPCA, R. 191 RoP.) without a confidentiality request under R. 262A RoP, which applies at least mutatis mutandis. This already follows from the fact that, according to R. 190.1, second sentence, RoP, the...

Follows from Order of 22 July 2025 by CFI CD containing enforceable penalty provisions, following an Order on injunctive relief issued by the Court of Appeal’s Order dated 30 April 2025. Order for the payment of penalty of EUR 150,000 for EoFlow’s non-compliance with obligations. (Article 62 UPCA, Article 82.4 UPCA, Ru...

IPPT.eu is pleased to announce that Los & Stigter has joined the platform as a Multi User Sponsor. The sponsorship supports IPPT.eu’s mission to publish European intellectual property case law and legal texts in a structured, searchable and practitioner-friendly format.

IPPT.eu is pleased to announce that Carpmaels & Ransford has joined the platform as a Multi User Sponsor. The sponsorship supports IPPT.eu’s mission to publish European intellectual property case law and legal texts in a structured, searchable and practitioner-friendly format.

Following an order for preservation and inspection of evidence, the unredacted version of the detailed description provided by the expert is disclosed to the Applicant without giving the Defendant the opportunity to comment on confidentiality interests. (Article 60 UPCA, Rule 199, Rule 197, 196 RoP). Disclosure does...

Ex- Parte order for Preservation and inspection of evidence granted (Art. 60 UPCA, R 192,  R. 194 (d),  197, 199 RoP). Applicant has credibly demonstrated that the “disposable morcellator“, exhibited at the MEDICA exhibition in Düsseldorf, makes use of the teaching of the patent in suit . All features set out in claims...