Rechtsfragen
Querschnittsansicht der Rechtsgrundsätze, wiederkehrender Argumente und des Stands der Technik, auf den sich das Gericht stützt.
Meistdiskutierte Rechtsgrundsätze
Wiederkehrende Rechtsgrundsätze über 1 Fälle mit extrahierter Begründung. Die Erfolgsquote zählt patenthalterfreundliche Ausgänge.
Häufigste zurückgewiesene Argumente
Argumente, die das UPC nicht akzeptiert hat, sortiert nach wiederholten Auftritten in Fällen.
| Argument | Partei | Fälle |
|---|---|---|
| preliminary cost reimbursement order should be granted in preliminary injunction proceedings | Kläger | 1 |
| validity attacks (best three arguments) defeat the patent at pi stage | Beklagter | 1 |
| application for seizure of goods should be maintained in full | Kläger | 1 |
| d7 (new prior art) submitted with written submission of 15 march 2024 admitted to revocation proceedings | Beklagter | 1 |
| revocation counterclaims — patent invalid | Beklagter | 1 |
| ep 3 350 592 as granted is valid | Kläger | 1 |
| auxiliary requests 1 and 2 are valid | Kläger | 1 |
| auxiliary requests for provisional measures based on amended claim versions should be admitted | Kläger | 1 |
| preliminary cost reimbursement of eur 168,000 should be granted to respondent | Beklagter | 1 |
| applications to amend the patent (auxiliary requests) should cure the added-matter defect | Beklagter | 1 |
| claims 1 and 11 of ep 3 972 309 are infringed by asus devices | Kläger | 1 |
| aorticlab's device infringes ep 2 129 425 because irregular patent-compliant use by medical professionals constitutes infringement | Kläger | 1 |
| private prior use right (in de, fr, it, ro) precludes infringement finding | Beklagter | 1 |
| invalidity of ep 2 839 083 b9 as originally granted (revocation counterclaim) | Beklagter | 1 |
| infringement is impossible due to features outside the patent claim that prevent the patented function from being achieved | Beklagter | 1 |
| claims 1 and 11 are supported by the parent application and do not go beyond its content | Kläger | 1 |
| auxiliary requests to amend the patent should cure the added-matter defect | Kläger | 1 |
| ep 2 493 466 (cabazitaxel antitumour use patent) is valid over the prior art | Kläger | 1 |
| no auxiliary requests for patent amendment filed | Kläger | 1 |
| the infringement action should succeed on the remaining valid claims | Kläger | 1 |
| full revocation of ep 3 215 288 including all amended claims | Beklagter | 1 |
| the patent as amended (auxiliary requests ar1-ar1-24) should be maintained as valid | Kläger | 1 |
| security for costs should be set at no more than eur 100,000 and may be provided by a us bank guarantee | Kläger | 1 |
| the written witness statement of dr. raleigh qualifies as a full witness statement under r. 175 rop | Kläger | 1 |
| ep 3 669 828 lacks inventive step and should be revoked | Beklagter | 1 |
Meistzitierter Stand der Technik
Über substanzielle Hauptsachefälle herangezogene Schriften und ihre typische Rolle.
| Schriftreferenz | Vorherrschende Rolle | Fälle |
|---|---|---|
| D7 (unspecified late-filed document) | Erfindungsmüh-Kombination | 1 |
| NHSC document (clinical/regulatory document disclosing cabazitaxel antitumour use in docetaxel-pretreated patients) | Neuheitsschädlich | 1 |
| prior public use / offenkundige Vorbenutzung of sintered metal preparation by Vibrantz | Neuheitsschädlich | 1 |
| ZP8-ZP9 (late-filed documents admitted in response to AR1-24) | Erfindungsmüh-Kombination | 1 |
| D3 | Neuheitsschädlich | 1 |