ORD 3876/2025

—·EP3404726: ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE

Verfahrensdetails: Status
—
Verfahrensart
Verfahrensantrag
Kategorie
Verfahrensführungsanordnungen
Parteien: Kläger
Photon Wave Co., Ltd.
Vertreter: Dorothea Hofer
Beklagte
Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.
Vertreter: Pauline Debré
Division: Paris LD
Richter: Camille Lignieres · Presiding Judge and Judge-rapporteur
Carine Gillet · Legally Qualified Judge
Peter Tochtermann · Legally Qualified Judge
Anthony Soledade · Technically Qualified Judge
Technology: Semiconductor Devices
Sprache: —
Erste Entscheidung: 24. Jan. 2025

Entscheidungen

2025-01-24
AbgewiesenZuständigkeitGeneric Order
The Paris Local Division declared the revocation action brought by Photon Wave Co. Ltd. against Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd. (EP 3 404 726) inadmissible, holding that a standalone revocation action by a third-party intervener in parallel infringement proceedings was not permitted under Articles 32 and 33 UPCA where the intervener had failed to comply with mandatory time limits for filing a counterclaim for revocation.
Rechtsfragen:Admissibility of standalone revocation action by intervener (Art. 33.3 and 33.4 UPCA)Time limits for counterclaim for revocationRole of third-party intervener

Dokumente