ORD_22456/2025

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

Prozessuale & UnteranträgeVersäumnisurteileMilan CDDecision By Default—

Übersicht Entscheidungen Zitate Dokumente Zeitverlauf

Parteien

Kläger

Insulet Corporation

Vertreter: Frank Peterreins (Peterreins Schley Patent- und Rechtsanwälte PartGmbH)

Beklagte

EOFLOW Co., Ltd.

Vertreter: Christopher Pierce (Hoyng Rokh Monegier)

Richter

Andrea PostiglionePresiding Judge / Judge-Rapporteur
Anna-Lena KleinLegally Qualified Judge
Uwe SchwengelbeckTechnically Qualified Judge

Patente

EP 4 201 327

CPC-Codes: A61M5/1723, A61M5/1452, A61M5/158, A61B5/14865, A61M5/14244, F04B9/02, A61B5/14532, A61M2230/201, A61M2005/14506, A61M5/14248, B65D83/761, A61M5/3291…

Sektor: Packaging & Conveying

Ausgang

Verletzt

Eingereicht: —

Erste Entscheidung: 28. Mai 2025

Sprache: —

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.

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.