Patent claims, and therewith infringement, can get lost in translation. The Dutch first instance court limited a patent’s scope of protection based on the Dutch translation of the claims. The Court of Appeal saw it differently. A thorough review of the translation of the claims remains necessary to avoid unwanted discussions on claim interpretation. To…
On 30 April 2024, the UPC’s Local Division Düsseldorf handed down a new chapter in the 10x Genomics saga. This time the case is not against NanoString (see this post on the lost appeal) but against the US-based company Curio (see this post on the earlier language appeal in this case). The central issue before…
As most readers will be well aware, one of the hottest topics in the patent world is the broadening of the Bolar provision envisaged in the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Union code relating to medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/83/EC and Directive…
On 3 June 2024, the UPC’s Hamburg Local Division rejected a PI application against UEFA (Union des Associations Européennes de Football) and Kinexon GmBH (a technology partner) in regard to the use of video-assistance referee (VAR) technology at the upcoming European Championship in Germany. The application for preliminary relief concerned EP 1 944 067 (EP…
On 28 May 2024, the UPC Court of Appeal (in decision UPC_CoA_22/2024) upheld a decision of the Court of First Instance, Central Division (Paris Seat) not to stay revocation proceedings before the UPC pending parallel opposition proceedings before the EPO concerning the same patent. Following previous Court of Appeal decisions, this non-technical appeal was adjudicated…
1. Preamble: The Iron Triangle In project management there is a law known as the Iron Triangle, which states that in delivering any project, there are three points on a metaphorical triangle: time, cost and quality. In other words: how fast can the project be done; how cheaply; and what is the quality of the…
Proceedings on the merits and proceedings on provisional measures may be lodged separately before the UPC, but it may also be the case that as part of the infringement case provisional measures are requested. In such a case before the Helsinki local division the first instance court held that the UPC was not competent (see…
On the 23 May 2024, the English Patents Court dismissed an application by Lenovo for an interim injunction to prevent Ericsson infringing one of Lenovo’s patents pending the outcome of the UK proceedings ([2024] EWHC 1267 (Ch)). In particular, the Court found that the application failed on the basis that damages are an adequate remedy…
On 24 April 2024, the UPC’s Central Division in Paris granted Nicoventures Trading Limited access to written pleadings and evidence under RoP 262.1(b) in a patent revocation case brought by NJOY Netherlands B.V. against Juul Labs International, Inc (ORD_587436/2023 in UPC_CFI_316/2023). Nicoventures had made the document access request on 15 November 2023, however the Paris…
On 13 May 2024, the UPC Court of Appeal (CoA) upheld the Munich Local Division’s decision in SES v Hanshow (UPC_CoA_1/2024) that a preliminary injunction should be refused on the basis that there was not sufficient certainty that certain models of Hanshow’s electronic label products infringe SES’ patent. SES is the registered proprietor of the…
