UPC Analytics
DEEN
Übersicht · Eingereicht: 12. Feb. 2024

UPC_CFI_54/2024

VERIFIABLE DEVICE ASSISTED SERVICE POLICY IMPLEMENTATION

VerletzungHauptverletzungsklageMunich LDInfringementCase Closed
Dieser Fall zitiert
In den Entscheidungen dieses Falls zitierte Quellen.

EPÜ-Artikel · 4

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
138revocation ground - extension beyond original disclosureHintergrundSamsung's invalidity attack based on Art. 138(1)(e) EPC was inadmissible under the applicable German and French law.
69security for costsBindendThe Court, when exercising its discretion under Art. 69(4) UPCA and R.158 RoP, must determine, in the light of the facts and arguments brought forward by the parties, whether the financial position of the claimant gives rise to a legitimate and real concern
138added matter / extension beyond original disclosureBindendSamsung contests the alleged infringement and lodged a counterclaim for revocation on 5 July 2024, invoking Arts. 138(1)(c), 123(2) EPC as well as Arts. 138(1)(a), 54 and 56 EPC
138novelty and inventive step - revocation groundsBindendinvoking Arts. 138(1)(c), 123(2) EPC as well as Arts. 138(1)(a), 54 and 56 EPC

Verfahrensordnung · 3

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
105order following interim conferenceBindendSUBJECT-MATTER Rule 105.5 Order following the Interim Conference of 28 February 2025.
175written witness statement requirementsBindendSamsung pointed out that Exhibit 'K Witness Raleigh' did not qualify as a written witness statement as it lacked some of the requirements set out in Rule 175 RoP.
158security for costsBindendSUBJECT-MATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS Patent infringement – Application pursuant to Rule 158 RoP.

UPC-Berufungsgericht · 1

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
UPC_CoA_217/2024legal standard for security for costs under R. 158 RoPBindendIn the order dated 17 September 2024 (UPC_CoA_217/2024 APL_25919/2024; UPC_CoA_219/2024 APL_25923/2024; UPC_CoA_221/2024 APL_25926/2024) the CoA has set out the legal standard for the application of R 158 RoP
Zitiert in
Spätere UPC-Entscheidungen, die diesen Fall zitieren.

Bisher in keiner anderen Entscheidung unseres Korpus zitiert.