UPC CFI 714/2024

Vor dem UPC: biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KG (7 Verfahren)·Light Guide Optics Germany GmbH (6 Verfahren)

• 2026-04-02
  Infringement ActionÖffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: The court rejected the defendants' application to stay the proceedings and ordered the appointment of a court-appointed expert under Rule 185 RoP to resolve disputed technical questions about the accused embodiment. The court found the patent in its granted form likely invalid but potentially valid in the form of auxiliary request 10B, and deferred any substantive ruling pending the expert's findings.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (7)

  • Stay of proceedings under Rule 295(a) RoP pending EPO opposition proceedings
  • Whether revocation by EPO Opposition Division between UPC oral hearing and pronouncement date requires mandatory stay
  • Admissibility of auxiliary requests filed in response to EPO preliminary opinion
  • Added subject-matter (Art. 76(1), 123(2) EPC) in granted claim 1 - omission of 'core' in fusing feature
  • Appointment of court expert under Rule 185 RoP to resolve conflicting technical evidence on infringement
  • Lateral emission mechanism (refraction vs. total internal reflection) in helical grooves of accused product
  • Whether cap of accused product is fused to optical fiber core or cladding