UPClytics
DeutschEnglish
AnmeldenRegistrieren
Alle Fälle anzeigen

UPC CFI 553/2025

19. Juni 2025·EP2387951 +1 more: Braided medical device and manufacturing method therefore

Verfahrensdetails
Status
Case Closed
Verfahrensart
Einstweilige Verfügung
Kategorie
Einstweilige Maßnahmen
Parteien
Kläger
Vertreter: Peter Koch
Division
Hamburg LD
Richter
Technology
Pharmaceutical & Medical
Sprache
English
Erste Entscheidung
21. Okt. 2025
Letzte Entscheidung
20. Mai 2026
Entscheidungen
  • 2026-05-20
    Nur KostenApplication for provisional measures

    The Hamburg Local Division found that the Defendants failed to comply with the Final Order of 21 October 2025 (preliminary injunction for patent EP2387951) by continuing to offer infringing products through their website, on the MedicalExpo B2B platform, and via email communications. The Court ordered the Defendants to pay a penalty of EUR 58,800 to the Court for past non-compliance (91 days on company website at EUR 500/day = EUR 45,500; 133 days on MedicalExpo at EUR 100/day = EUR 13,300), plus a recurring penalty of up to EUR 1,500 per day for any future non-compliance.

    Rechtsfragen:Non-compliance with penalty-reinforced preliminary injunction order (R. 354.4 RoP)Meaning of 'offering' under Art. 25(a) UPCA in enforcement contextDefendant's responsibility for third-party actions (website provider, MedicalExpo automatic translations)Sufficiency of disclaimers when contradicted by surrounding contentProportionality of penalty payments under Art. 82(4) UPCABad faith inquiry as defence to non-compliance finding
  • 2025-10-21
    PI erteiltEinstweilige VerfügungApplication for provisional measures

    The Hamburg Local Division granted Occlutech GmbH's application for a preliminary injunction against Lepu Medical Technology (Beijing) Co. Ltd. and Lepu Medical (Europe) Cooperatief U.A. for threatened infringement of EP 2 387 951 (braided occlusion device). The Court held that CE-mark approval for the defendants' competing medical device constituted imminent infringement under R. 206.2(c) RoP, regardless of whether the applicant had prior knowledge. An injunction was issued prohibiting offering, placing on the market, and use in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Ireland. Value: EUR 1,000,000; defendants bear costs.

    Rechtsfragen:Imminent infringement and CE-mark approval (Art. 62(2) UPCA; R. 206.2(c) RoP)Competence (Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA)Prior knowledge of applicant irrelevant after CE-markMedical devices (Regulation (EU) 2017/745)
Dokumente
DokumenttitelDatumÖffentlich
action.communication.general2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Fee2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-05-20Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-05-20Öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-12Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-12Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2026-05-12Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-05-07Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-04-08Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-04-08Nicht öffentlich
Application document Defendant2026-04-08Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-03-27Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-03-25Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-03-25Nicht öffentlich
Document Claimant2026-03-25Nicht öffentlich
Document Claimant2026-03-25Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-03-16Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
Application document Defendant2026-03-12Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-03-03Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Fee2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2026-03-02Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
action.phaseChange.caseClose2025-10-21Nicht öffentlich
action.issueDecision.decision2025-10-21Nicht öffentlich
Final Order2025-10-21Öffentlich
action.issueDecision.decision2025-10-21Nicht öffentlich
Final Order2025-10-21Nicht öffentlich
action.phaseChange.oralPhaseOpen2025-10-21Nicht öffentlich
Other Documents2025-09-29Nicht öffentlich
2025-08-01_Noerr_Reply_Provisional_Measures_ACT_29239_20252025-08-01Nicht öffentlich
2025-08-01_Noerr_Reply_Provisional_Measures_ACT_29239_20252025-08-01Nicht öffentlich
Open workflow2025-08-01Nicht öffentlich
Summon-Oral-Hearing2025-07-28Nicht öffentlich
Summons2025-07-28Öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ82025-07-25Nicht öffentlich
Response_Occlutech_EP9512025-07-25Nicht öffentlich
Outcome of the Order2025-07-16Nicht öffentlich
Hear parties2025-07-16Öffentlich
Confidentiality order2025-07-16Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
2025.07.15_Noerr_Objection to the Application for Provisional Measures_ACT_29239_2025_redacted2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
2025.07.15_Noerr_Application_262A2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_D_01_Feature_Breakdown2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
2025.07.15_Noerr_Objection to the Application for Provisional Measures_ACT_29239_20252025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_DN_01_WO_2008040555_A22025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_DN_02_WO_9601591_A12025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_D_03_Original Description of the Patent in Suit2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_DN_01a_WO_2008040555_A2_EN2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_D_02_Response to Communication pursuant to Rule 69 EPC2025-07-15Nicht öffentlich
Panel-Appointment2025-07-09Nicht öffentlich
Outcome of the Order2025-06-30Nicht öffentlich
deadline extension2025-06-30Öffentlich
Receipt2025-06-26Nicht öffentlich
2025.06.25_Time_Extension_Request_ACT_29239_20252025-06-25Nicht öffentlich
Notification Of Service2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Receipt of service2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Notification Of Service2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Receipt of service2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Acknowledgement of access to case2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Acknowledgement of access to case2025-06-24Nicht öffentlich
Panel-Appointment2025-06-20Nicht öffentlich
Letter-for-Service2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Letter-for-Service2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Order2025-06-19Öffentlich
Notice-to-Accompany-Service-of-Order-for-Measures2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Notice-to-Accompany-Service-of-Order-for-Measures2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Panel-Appointment2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Application-For-Measures-Receipt2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Application-For-Measures-Acknowledgement2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ32025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Application for provisional meassures2025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ42025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ12025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ62025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ52025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ72025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit_Occ22025-06-19Nicht öffentlich
Zusammenfassung in einfacher Sprache

Occlutech GmbH obtained a preliminary injunction from the Hamburg Local Division against Lepu Medical (Beijing and Europe) prohibiting the threatened infringement of EP 2 387 951 B1 (braided occlusion device for cardiac defects) across Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, and Ireland. The court established an important principle that CE-mark approval alone signals imminent EU market entry and therefore imminent patent infringement; prior applicant knowledge of the device before CE marking is irrelevant to the urgency threshold.

Angenommene Argumente
Was das Gericht akzeptiert hat — nach Partei.

  • CE-mark approval constitutes imminent infringement sufficient for PI application under R. 206.2(c) RoP regardless of prior applicant knowledge

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62(2) UPCA; R. 206.2(c) RoP; Art. 5.1 Regulation (EU) 2017/745

    Hinweis: Court held that obtaining CE-mark approval (required for legal EU market entry) signals imminent market entry and therefore imminent infringement; the applicant's prior knowledge of the device is irrelevant because the CE mark is the triggering event.

  • Hamburg Local Division has competence under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA given imminent infringement in Germany

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA

    Hinweis: CE-mark approval combined with trade fair announcement and ordering information established threatened German infringement.

  • Occlutech's EP 2 387 951 is infringed by Lepu's braided occlusion device

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA

    Hinweis: Hamburg Local Division granted the PI across Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, and Ireland.

Zurückgewiesene Argumente
Was das Gericht nicht akzeptiert hat — und warum.

  • Security/enforcement bond should be ordered against Occlutech

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 211.5 RoP

    Begründung: Court found defendants did not substantiate the sales price and expected volumes needed to estimate damage, and did not show serious difficulties in recovering damages from the EU-based claimant with sufficient funds.

Zentrale Rechtsgrundsätze
In der Begründung herangezogene Doktrinen und Regeln.
CE-mark approval for a medical device signals imminent market entry across all EU member states and constitutes an indication of imminent infringement under R. 206.2(c) RoPApplicant's prior knowledge of the accused device before CE-mark approval is irrelevant to urgency; the CE mark is the relevant triggering eventCE-mark approval combined with public trade fair announcement and provision of ordering information constitutes 'setting the stage to market' for purposes of imminent infringementDefendants seeking security must substantiate potential damage with specifics including sales price and volume projections

Weitere Fälle zu diesem Grundsatz ansehen.