UPC CFI 324/2024

The accused pile tip device has the required capability under the patent claim even if the patented function is only occasionally or accidentally achieved

Hinweis: Court held that infringement exists where the device has the required capability; whether the patented effects are regularly, occasionally, or accidentally achieved and whether the user intends to achieve them is irrelevant.

Burden of proof for impossibility of infringement lies with defendants, not the patentee

Hinweis: Where defendants argue infringement is impossible due to features outside the patent claim, they bear the burden of proof for that assertion; claimant need not address features outside the claim.

Patent as amended (auxiliary requests) avoids invalidity and is infringed

Hinweis: Court accepted patent amendments via auxiliary requests, maintaining the patent in amended form and finding infringement of the amended claims.

Invalidity of EP 2 839 083 B9 as originally granted (revocation counterclaim)

Begründung: Patent was maintained in amended form via auxiliary requests; original invalidity finding did not defeat the infringement claim.

Infringement is impossible due to features outside the patent claim that prevent the patented function from being achieved

Begründung: Defendants bear the burden of proof for this impossibility argument; infringement turns on capability under the claim, not on whether the patented effect is always or ever intended.