UPC CFI 461/2024

'The same invention' standard in Art. 87 EPC corresponds to the added-matter disclosure standard (direct and unambiguous derivation)

Hinweis: Court confirmed priority claim is valid where the skilled person can directly and unambiguously derive the claimed subject-matter from the priority document as a whole using common general knowledge.

FAKRO products infringe EP 2 476 814 B1 (floor seal device/attic steps) as construed

Hinweis: Court granted injunction, recall, removal from distribution channels, and information orders confirming infringement.

A term mentioned only generally in a claim cannot be restricted to a specific configuration disclosed only in cited prior art without further specification in the claim

Hinweis: Court rejected FAKRO's attempt to narrow a general claim term based on how it appeared in prior art cited in the patent description.

Inventive step attack based on documents already in the proceedings, raised for the first time at oral hearing

Begründung: All invalidity attacks must be introduced in the counterclaim for revocation; it is not permissible to raise a new lack-of-inventive-step argument based on documents already in the file for the first time at oral hearing.

Counterclaim for revocation: EP 2 476 814 B1 is invalid

Begründung: Revocation counterclaim rejected; priority was valid under the direct-and-unambiguous standard; other validity attacks were either out of time or substantively unfounded.