UPC CFI, LD Paris, 10 April 2026: Provisional injunction denied on grounds of novelty - Implicit disclosure of features.
15-07-2026 Print this page
Provisional injunction denied. More likely than not that Claim 1 is invalid for lack of novelty. (Article 65 UPCA, Article 54 EPC , Rule 206 RoP, Rule 211 RoP).
Implicit disclosure of “air fryer” feature in prior art (CN830)- when a person skilled in the art would objectively consider as necessarily implied in the explicit content of a prior-art document or would arrive, inevitably and without any reasonable doubt, at the result falling within the scope of the claim by applying the teaching of the prior-art document.
Prior art not only discloses all other features of Claim 1, but also the essential elements required for the air-fryer mode.
Most of these features are clearly shown in Fig. 2 and are thus explicitly disclosed even if not mentioned in words in the description.[….] Only the fan is not shown/visible in Fig. 2; however, the clear presence of an electric motor with its axis pointing downwards would be understood by the skilled person in no other way than that there is a fan mounted on said axis, as the only possible reason to have such motor and axis in the shown position is to rotate a fan.
