UPC Local Division Düsseldorf, 4 December 2023: Splitting proceedings for two different patents

19-12-2023 Print this page
IPPT20231204, UPC CFI, LD Düsseldorf, Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce

Separate infringement proceedings ordered for two different patents (Rule 302 RoP), no separate proceedings for the two different defendants (Rule 303 RoP). The patents in dispute can each be challenged in terms of their legal status. As a result, a different course of proceedings is possible and not unlikely. The parties have therefore rightly not opposed such a separation of proceedings. In the view of the local division, such a separation of proceedings should take place as early as possible to facilitate handling. In contrast, the Local Chamber currently sees no reason for a separation in accordance with R. 303.2 VerfO. Even if the action is directed against two defendants, it concerns the same contested embodiment. Therefore, there are considerable synergy effects with regard to both the interpretation and the answer to the question of infringement. For this reason alone, it is justified to refrain from separating the proceedings with regard to the defendants. 

 

IPPT20231204, UPC CFI, LD Düsseldorf, Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce