UPC_CoA_464/2024

A SYSTEM COMPRISING A PROSTHETIC VALVE AND A DELIVERY CATHETER

BerufungenHauptberufungCourt of AppealAppealCase Closed

Dieser Fall zitiert

In den Entscheidungen dieses Falls zitierte Quellen.

Quelle	Rechtsfrage	Bindungskraft	Auszug
33(4)	jurisdiction — same parties concept for consolidated proceedings	Bindend	The concept of the "same parties" of Art. 33(4) UPCA must be understood as requiring the parties to be identical.
56	inventive step — statutory standard	Bindend	A European patent is only validly granted for an invention if ... it involves an inventive step ... if, having regard to the state of the art, it is not obvious to a person skilled in the art (Art. 56 EPC).
69(2)	costs — equitable apportionment on partial success	Bindend	The Court of Appeal will therefore apportion the costs equitably pursuant to Art. 69(2) UPCA.

Quelle	Rechtsfrage	Bindungskraft	Auszug
49.2	claim amendment — admissibility in defence to revocation	Bindend	Under R. 49.2 RoP, the Defence to revocation may include an application to amend the patent.
50.2	claim amendment — subsequent request requires court permission	Bindend	Pursuant to R. 50.2 in conjunction with R. 30.2 RoP, a subsequent request to amend the patent may only be admitted into the proceedings with the permission of the Court.

Quelle	Rechtsfrage	Bindungskraft	Auszug
UPC_CoA_523/2024	jurisdiction — territorial scope of injunction after Romania accession	Abgegrenzt	Edwards' reference to the Court of Appeal's order in the case of Syngenta v Sumi Agro (UPC_CoA_523/2024, order of 3 March 2025) cannot alter that assessment.

Zitiert in

Spätere UPC-Entscheidungen, die diesen Fall zitieren.

Zitiert in	Datum	Rechtsfrage	Bindungskraft	Auszug
UPC_CFI_337/2025 Munich CD	1. Dez. 2025	inventive step and sufficiency	Bindend	in light of the Court of Appeal's recent decisions dated 25 November 2025, in cases UPC_CoA_464/2024 and related cases (Meril/Edwards), as well as cases UPC_CoA_528 and 529/2024 (Amgen/Sanofi and Regeneron).