UPClytics
DeutschEnglish
AnmeldenRegistrieren
Alle Fälle anzeigen

ORD 22456/2025

—·EP4201327: FLUID DELIVERY DEVICE WITH TRANSCUTANEOUS ACCESS TOOL, INSERTION MECHANISM AND BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING FOR USE THEREWITH

Verfahrensdetails
Status
—
Verfahrensart
Versäumnisurteil
Kategorie
Versäumnisurteile
Parteien
Kläger
Vertreter: Frank Peterreins (Peterreins Schley)
Beklagte
Vertreter: Christopher Pierce (Hoyng Rokh Monegier)
Division
Milan CD
Richter
Technology
Packaging & Conveying
Sprache
—
Erste Entscheidung
28. Mai 2025
Ansprüche
Streitigall
Aufrechterhaltenall
Verletztall
Hinweise: Milan Central Division (same decision as CC_65201/2024) found EOFLOW infringed EP 4 201 327; revocation action dismissed; patent maintained; no specific claim numbers enumerated in excerpt.
Entscheidungen
  • 2025-05-28
    VerletztUnterlassung angeordnetVersäumnisurteilDecision By Default

    Decision by Milan Central Division (UPC_CFI_597/2024, 22 July 2025) on EOFLOW's revocation action and Insulet's counterclaim for infringement of EP 4 201 327 (wearable insulin pump / patch pump). The court rejected EOFLOW's revocation action (patent upheld as valid) and found EOFLOW's EOPatch product infringed the patent. The court ordered an injunction across 16 UPC member states, product recall, removal from distribution channels, destruction, and full information obligations. The decision also addressed the decision-by-default procedure, patent lexicon interpretation, and the cap on recoverable costs in parallel proceedings.

    Rechtsfragen:Revocation action (patent maintained)Infringement (found)Decision by default (R. 355.2 RoP)Claim interpretation / patent lexiconInjunction, recall and destructionCosts cap in double litigation (Art. 1(3) Admin Committee decision)
    Schadenersatz: Haftung festgestellt, Höhe vorbehalten
Dokumente
  • 94C54ABAB44EA845CCDECAF6E1B90AFF_en.pdf2025-05-28EN