UPC CFI, LD Dusseldorf, 29 August 2025: infringement by equivalence does not constitute an amendment of the case

Application for leave to amend the claim denied (R. 263 RoP). 

The fact that the Claimant seeks to claim infringement by equivalence does not constitute an amendment of the case. 

Extending the equivalence argument to features 1.9 and 1.10 does not alter the nature or scope of the dispute. 

The equivalence argument remains based on the same patent and is directed against the same products, namely the challenged strollers having swivel locking devices. 

Other restrictions on raising new arguments – with regard to R. 13 RoP and R. 9.2 RoP – are not subject of the application and will therefore have to be decided at a later date.

IPPT20250829, UPC LD Dusseldorf, Wonderland v Cybex.