Request for expedition of appeals rejected (Rule 9.3(b) RoP).
Possibility that the Munich Local Division might grant an injunction on the basis of a patent that has been upheld by the Court of First Instance but may subsequently be revoked by the Court of Appeal, is not sufficient to justify expediting the appeals. The Munich Local Division has various means at its disposal to mitigate the risk of granting an injunction or the harm caused by such an injunction, in situations where the validity of the patent is subject to appeals. For example, the division can stay the infringement proceedings pending the appeals or render its decision under the condition subsequent that the patent is not held invalid by a final decision in the revocation proceedings (R. 118.2 RoP).
Furthermore, the requested expedition cannot prevent the alleged harm to Meril from an injunction given that in the proposed expedited timetable the oral hearing in the appeal is scheduled for mid-January 2025 and the oral hearing in the infringement proceedings has been scheduled for 24 September 2024.
