UPC CFI 1230/2026
13. Apr. 2026·EP4201327 Einheitspatent · FLUID DELIVERY DEVICE WITH TRANSCUTANEOUS ACCESS TOOL, INSERTION MECHANISM AND BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING FOR USE THEREWITH
- Verfahrensdetails
- StatusCase ClosedVerfahrensartAllgemeinKategorieAllgemein
- Parteien
- Kläger
- Insulet CorporationUnternehmen
Vertreter- Marc Grunwald-Peterreins Schley
- Frank Peterreins-Peterreins Schley
- Maximilian Gross-Peterreins Schley
- Division
- Milan CD
- Technologie
- InstrumentsMedical technology
- Sprache
- English
- Erste Entscheidung
- 12. Juni 2026
- EPA-Einspruch
- EOFlow Co., Ltd.Zurückgenommen2025-03-18
- KELLER SCHNEIDER PATENTANWALTS GMBHZulässig2025-03-19
- Inspicos P/SZurückgenommen2025-03-19
| Median Tage bis zur ersten Entscheidung | |
|---|---|
| Gesamt-UPC | 124 |
| Milan CD | Gesperrt |
| Richter Andrea Postiglione | Gesperrt |
| Richter Anna-Lena Klein | Gesperrt |
| Richter Uwe Schwengelbeck | Gesperrt |
Vor dem UPC: Insulet Corporation (25 Verfahren)·EOFLOW Co., Ltd. (19 Verfahren)
Dieser Streit umfasst 18 weitere Verfahren
UPC CoA 34/2026·UPC CoA 930/2025·UPC CFI 1167/2025·UPC CFI 773/2025·UPC CFI 774/2025 und 13 weitere
3 weitere Beklagte zum selben oder einem verwandten Patent
Starten Sie die kostenlose Testphase, um die Ausgänge zu sehen.
- 2026-06-12
Zusammenfassung: The Milan Central Division ordered EOFLOW Co. Ltd to pay INSULET Corporation EUR 14,000 as reasonable and proportionate legal costs covering proceedings related to EOFLOW's application for leave to appeal (EUR 4,000) and the appellate proceedings before the Court of Appeal regarding EOFLOW's appeal against a penalty order (EUR 10,000). The confidentiality requests under Rules 262A and 262.2 RoP were dismissed.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (6)
- Timeliness of costs application under Rule 151.1 RoP
- Scope of prior costs award of EUR 10,000 from 4 December 2025 order
- Reasonableness and proportionality of legal costs under Rule 150 RoP
- Confidentiality of cost narratives and invoices under Rules 262.2 and 262A RoP and Article 58 UPCA
- Recoverability of costs for confidentiality applications
- Applicable costs ceiling based on case value
| Dokumenttitel | Datum | Öffentlich |
|---|---|---|
| Veröffentlichung | 2026-06-12 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Verfahren abgeschlossen | 2026-06-12 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Entscheidung | 2026-06-12 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Final Order | 2026-06-12 | Öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-06-01 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-06-01 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Exhibit Defendant/Respondent | 2026-06-01 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Submission Defendant/Respondent | 2026-06-01 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-05-22 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-22 | Nicht öffentlich |
Cost application was filed on time under Rule 151.1 RoP
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Rule 151.1 RoPCosts claimed were not covered by the earlier EUR 10,000 award
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Rule 150 et seq. RoPINSULET as successful party is entitled to recover costs of defending the appeal and responding to the leave-to-appeal application
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Rule 150 RoP
Application was out of time under Rule 151.1 RoP because the appeal had already been rejected by the CoA in February 2026
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Rule 151.1 RoPCosts relating to leave-to-appeal proceedings either belonged exclusively to the appellate phase or had already been absorbed by the earlier EUR 10,000 award
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Rule 150 RoPSums claimed were disproportionate and the case value for recoverable costs was overstated
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Rule 150 RoPCost narratives and invoices are entitled to confidentiality protection under Rules 262A and 262.2 RoP
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Rules 262.2 and 262A RoP; Article 58 UPCA