UPC CFI 497/2024
30. Sept. 2024·EP3756767 Einheitspatent · MODULAR POINT-OF-CARE DEVICES AND USES THEREOF
Hauptaktenzeichen: ACT 48305/2024
- Verfahrensdetails
- StatusCase Closed (Patent geändert aufrechterhalten)VerfahrensartNichtigkeitKategorieHauptnichtigkeitsklage
- Parteien
- Kläger
- bioMérieux UK LimitedUnternehmen
Vertreter- Benjamin Husband-Carpmaels & Ransford
- Hadi Godazgar
- Hiske Roos
- Ben Chapman
- Lawrence Paleschi
- Agathe Michel-De-Cazotte-Carpmaels & Ransford
- Division
- Milan CD
- Technologie
- InstrumentsMeasurement · Analysis of biological materials
- ChemistryChemical engineering
- Sprache
- English
- Erste Entscheidung
- 18. Juli 2025
- Letzte Entscheidung
- 23. Okt. 2025
- EPA-Einspruch
- bioMérieux société anonyme (SA)Zulässig2025-01-31
| Patent nichtig | Median Tage bis zur ersten Entscheidung | |
|---|---|---|
| Gesamt-UPC | 37% (34/91) | 124 |
| Milan CD | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Andrea Postiglione | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Marije Knijff | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Michel Abello | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
Vor dem UPC: bioMérieux Group (12 Verfahren)·Labrador Diagnostics LLC (7 Verfahren)
Dieser Streit umfasst 1 weitere Verfahren
5 weitere Beklagte zum selben oder einem verwandten Patent
UPC CoA 47/2026·UPC CoA 937/2025·UPC CFI 571/2024·UPC CFI 315/2024·CC 54050/2024
Starten Sie die kostenlose Testphase, um die Ausgänge zu sehen.
- 2025-10-23Revocation ActionÖffentlich
Zusammenfassung: The Central Division Milan rejected the revocation action by bioMérieux against Labrador Diagnostics' EP 3 756 767 B1 (diagnostic test patent), maintaining the patent in amended form pursuant to Auxiliary Request 3; bioMérieux was ordered to pay EUR 400,000 in legal costs to Labrador.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (4)
- Revocation action - novelty, inventive step, added subject-matter, sufficiency
- Auxiliary requests and patent amendment
- Proportionality in managing multiple invalidity attacks
- Confidentiality of agreed costs amount
- 2025-07-18Revocation ActionÖffentlich
Zusammenfassung: Procedural order issued after the interim conference of 14 July 2025 in a revocation/counterclaim for revocation action concerning EP 3 756 767. The order sets out case management decisions including the oral hearing schedule, treatment of declarants, submission deadlines, and requests parties to agree on the value of the action.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (4)
- Case management for revocation action
- Value of the action
- Oral hearing preparation
- Declarants
| Dokumenttitel | Datum | Öffentlich |
|---|---|---|
| Verfahren abgeschlossen | 2025-10-23 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Decision | 2025-10-23 | Öffentlich |
| Entscheidung | 2025-10-23 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Entscheidung | 2025-10-23 | Nicht öffentlich |
| 48305/2024/OH/MIL-CTL/UPC2025091210AM | 2025-09-16 | Nicht öffentlich |
| 48305/2024/OH/MIL-CTL/UPC2025091210AM | 2025-09-16 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2025-09-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2025-09-10 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2025-09-10 | Nicht öffentlich |
| 2025.09.10 - Submission re value of actions and preliminary estimate of costs | 2025-09-10 | Nicht öffentlich |
bioMérieux UK Limited and related entities brought a revocation action at the Milan Central Division against Labrador Diagnostics LLC's EP 3 756 767 B1 (modular point-of-care diagnostic test device). The court rejected all invalidity attacks including novelty, inventive step, added subject-matter and sufficiency against the claims as amended by Auxiliary Request 3, maintaining the patent in that amended form. bioMérieux was ordered to pay EUR 400,000 in legal costs (two-thirds of the EUR 600,000 ceiling), with the court declining Labrador's request to keep the agreed cost amount confidential.
The most promising invalidity attacks should be identified and unmanageable numbers of attacks may be limited by the court
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: UPC RoP preamble (proportionality, speed)Hinweis: Court held that when a party submits an unmanageable number of attacks, those not identified as most promising need not be assessed if the promising ones fail.
Patent EP 3 756 767 B1 is valid and maintained as amended by Auxiliary Request 3
BeklagterHinweis: All attacks based on novelty, inventive step and sufficiency against AR3 failed; the patent was maintained in amended form.
Amount of agreed legal costs need not be kept confidential as it does not reveal company financial strategy or patent asset value
KlägerHinweis: Court declined to keep the EUR 400,000 cost figure confidential, ruling it did not inherently disclose commercially sensitive information.
EP 3 756 767 B1 (diagnostic test patent) is invalid for added subject-matter, lack of novelty, lack of inventive step, and insufficiency
KlägerBegründung: All the most promising attacks were assessed and none affected validity of the claims under AR3; remaining attacks were presumed unable to succeed.
Agreed amount of legal costs should be ordered confidential
BeklagterBegründung: The agreed amount of legal costs does not in itself reveal company financial capacity, commercial strategy or importance of the patent as a corporate asset.
Weitere Fälle zu diesem Grundsatz ansehen.