UPC CFI 716/2024
22. Nov. 2024·EP2037175 · Premixed burner
- Verfahrensdetails
- StatusCase Closed (Patent verletzt)VerfahrensartVerletzungKategorieHauptverletzungsklage
- Parteien
- Beklagte
- NV Bekaert SAUnternehmen
- Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V.Unternehmen
Vertreter- Marc van Wijngaarden
- Division
- Mannheim LD
- Technologie
- Mechanical engineeringThermal processes and apparatus
- Sprache
- English
- Erste Entscheidung
- 18. Dez. 2025
- EPA-Einspruch
- Worgas Bruciatori S.r.l.Zulässig2017-08-02
- Viessmann Werke GmbH & Co. KGZulässig2017-08-22
- BEKAERT COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGY B.V.Zulässig2017-08-22
- Viessmann Group GmbH & Co. KGZulässig2017-08-22
| Verletzung festgestellt | Median Tage bis zur ersten Entscheidung | |
|---|---|---|
| Gesamt-UPC | 53% (62/117) | 124 |
| Mannheim LD | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Peter Tochtermann | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Dirk Böttcher | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Carine Gillet | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
| Richter Elisabetta Papa | Gesperrt | Gesperrt |
Vor dem UPC: Polidoro S.p.a. (8 Verfahren)·NV Bekaert SA (4 Verfahren)
Dieser Streit umfasst 5 weitere Verfahren
UPC CoA 29/2026·UPC CoA 30/2026·UPC CFI 193/2026·UPC CFI 194/2026·UPC CFI 205/2025
1 weitere Beklagte zum selben oder einem verwandten Patent
Starten Sie die kostenlose Testphase, um die Ausgänge zu sehen.
Weitere Verfahren: Mannheim LD·2024
- 2025-12-18Infringement ActionÖffentlich
Zusammenfassung: The Mannheim Local Division found that Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V. and NV Bekaert SA infringed Polidoro's premixed burner patent EP 2 037 175 and granted an injunction, recall/removal, destruction, information order, interim damages, and publication of the decision.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (3)
- Patent infringement (premixed burner)
- Claim construction
- Recall and removal from distribution channels
- 2025-05-08
Zusammenfassung: Procedural order granting Claimant Polidoro S.p.a. a one-week extension to 19 May 2025 for filing its Reply to the Statement of Defence and Defence to the Counterclaim for Revocation. Extension justified because access to the unredacted version of the Statement of Defence was delayed under Rule 262A RoP.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (2)
- Extension of time period (Rule 9.3 RoP)
- Delayed access to unredacted Statement of Defence (Rule 262A RoP)
| Dokumenttitel | Datum | Öffentlich |
|---|---|---|
| Anordnung | 2026-07-02 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Order | 2026-07-02 | Öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Application document Defendant | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Document Claimant | 2026-06-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Anordnung | 2026-05-07 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Order | 2026-05-07 | Öffentlich |
Polidoro S.p.a. sued Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V. and NV Bekaert SA for infringement of EP 2 037 175 B2 (a premixed burner patent, upheld in limited form after EPO opposition). The Mannheim Local Division found direct infringement of claim 1 and granted a full injunction, recall, information and interim-damages order across seven UPCA states, while dismissing the defendants' revocation counterclaim; defendants bear 75% of costs.
Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V. directly infringes claim 1 of EP 2 037 175 B2 (premixed burner)
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 25 UPCA; direct infringementHinweis: Mannheim Local Division found all features of claim 1 realised in the Bekaert accused product, granting injunction across Austria, Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands and Portugal.
NV Bekaert SA is jointly liable for infringement by its subsidiary Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V.
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 25 UPCAHinweis: Parent company found co-liable for acts of offering, placing on the market, importing and storing infringing products.
Patent survived opposition/appeal at EPO and should be given full weight as upheld in limited B2 form
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Opposition proceedings before EPO Board of AppealHinweis: The Board of Appeal upheld the patent in limited form, and the opposition decision was published on 27 November 2024; defendants' counterclaim for revocation was dismissed.
Counterclaim for revocation: patent lacks validity
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 65 UPCABegründung: Counterclaim for revocation was dismissed; no further detail visible in the excerpt.
Alleged disproportionate harm from injunction (late-filed claim about magnitude of damage)
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Proportionality; late-filing ruleBegründung: The statement made for the first time at oral hearing was belated and therefore disregarded; in any event, the orders related only to one of two attacked embodiments, reducing the alleged damage accordingly.
Weitere Fälle zu diesem Grundsatz ansehen.
Claim 1 (B2 form after opposition) was central: it covers a premixed burner with a tubular body, at least one disk with through-holes constituting the distribution head, a plate closing the opposite end, and the disk made integrally with a flange — specifically characterised by the absence of an inner distributor. The court found the Bekaert product met all these features.