UPClytics
DeutschEnglish
AnmeldenRegistrieren
Alle Fälle anzeigen

UPC CoA 901/2025

6. Nov. 2025·EP3988471: DISPLAYS FOR A MEDICAL DEVICE

Verfahrensdetails
Status
Case Closed
Verfahrensart
Berufung
Kategorie
Hauptberufung
Parteien
Kläger
Vertreter: Christian Dekoninck (Taylor Wessing N.V., Brussels, Belgium)
Beklagte
Vertreter: Thierry Lautier (Bird & Bird AARPI, Paris, France); Edoardo Barbera (Bird & Bird Società tra Avvocati S.r.l., Milan, Italy)
Division
Court of Appeal
Richter
Technology
Healthcare Informatics
Sprache
English
Erste Entscheidung
17. Apr. 2026
Ansprüche
Streitig1, 14
Verletzt1, 14
Hinweise: This is a preliminary injunction (provisional measures) order, not a final merits decision. The Court of Appeal found it more likely than not that claims 1 and 14 are valid and indirectly infringed by the GlucoMen iCan CGM system and iCan App. The Court set aside the first-instance finding of non-infringement based on incorrect claim construction of feature 1.13(c).
Entscheidungen
  • 2026-04-17
    PI erteiltBerufungsentscheidungAppeal RoP220.1

    The Court of Appeal set aside the first-instance order of the Local Division The Hague (which had dismissed Abbott's application for provisional measures) and granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting Respondents from indirectly infringing claims 1 and 14 of EP 3 988 471 B2 in all UPC Contracting Member States except Romania. The Court found it more likely than not that the patent is valid and infringed by the GlucoMen iCan CGM system, and declared the Respondents' cross-appeal on urgency inadmissible.

    Rechtsfragen:Claim construction — whether event data icons must be displayed on or near the graph line of the timeline graph, or whether placement in a separate panel/section sufficesInfringement — whether GlucoMen iCan (CGM system and iCan App) infringes claims 1 and 14 of EP 3 988 471Validity — added matter (claims 1 and 14)Validity — inventive step, including treatment of non-technical features under Art. 52(2) EPCUrgency — whether Appellant acted with sufficient diligence before filing the preliminary injunction applicationNecessity and balance of interests — whether preliminary injunction was warranted given competitive dynamics and market harmAdmissibility of cross-appeal — whether Respondents were adversely affected by the first-instance order for purposes of R. 220.1 / R. 237 RoPTerritorial scope of injunction — exclusion of Romania; non-extension to Sinocare iCan i3Security for enforcement — request under Art. 82(2) UPCA and R. 352 RoP rejected
Dokumente
DokumenttitelDatumÖffentlich
action.phaseChange.caseClose2026-04-17Nicht öffentlich
action.issueDecision.decision2026-04-17Nicht öffentlich
Final Order2026-04-17Öffentlich
action.phaseChange.oralPhaseClose2026-03-26Nicht öffentlich
Hearing recording reference document2026-03-26Nicht öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-20Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-03-20Öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-20Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-03-20Öffentlich
Receipt2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
Application Appellant2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
Application Respondent2026-03-19Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-02-25Nicht öffentlich
action.summons.oralHearing2026-01-20Nicht öffentlich
Summons2026-01-20Öffentlich
Receipt2026-01-19Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-01-19Nicht öffentlich
Document2026-01-19Nicht öffentlich
Document2026-01-19Nicht öffentlich
Document2026-01-19Nicht öffentlich
action.phaseChange.oralPhaseOpen2026-01-14Nicht öffentlich
action.phaseChange.writtenPhaseClose2026-01-14Nicht öffentlich
action.summons.oralHearing2026-01-13Nicht öffentlich
Summons2026-01-13Öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-01-09Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-01-09Öffentlich
Note2025-12-23Nicht öffentlich
Note2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Statement of Response2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Other document Respondent2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-12-18Nicht öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2025-12-15Nicht öffentlich
Order2025-12-15Öffentlich
Note2025-12-05Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-12-05Nicht öffentlich
Application document Respondent2025-12-05Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-05Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-12-05Nicht öffentlich
action.communication.general2025-12-02Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-12-02Nicht öffentlich
Further pleadings2025-12-02Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-12-02Nicht öffentlich
Formal Deficiency found2025-12-02Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Fee2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Respondent2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Proof of payment2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Statement of Response including Statement of cross-appeal2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Proof of payment2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Note2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Note2025-12-01Nicht öffentlich
Note2025-11-19Nicht öffentlich
Note2025-11-19Nicht öffentlich
action.publishOrderDecision.case2025-11-14Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Fee2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Proof of payment2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Statement of appeal and statement of the grounds of appeal2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Other document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit document Appellant2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2025-11-06Nicht öffentlich
Angenommene Argumente
Was das Gericht akzeptiert hat — nach Partei.

  • The event data icons feature (1.13(c)) of claim 1 requires only that icons are placed at locations on the graph according to the time of the event, not that they appear on or near the graph line itself; the GlucoMen iCan therefore satisfies this feature.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 69 EPC and Protocol on Interpretation; claim construction principles from UPC_CoA_335/2023 and UPC_CoA_768/2024

  • A non-technical feature should not be excluded from the assessment of inventive step merely because it would be a 'non-invention' under Art. 52(2) EPC standing alone; it may still contribute to technical character through interaction with other claim features.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 52(2) EPC; inventive step assessment principles

  • Urgency requirements were satisfied: the relevant date was 24 April 2025 (product launch / user guide publication), and Appellant filed its application approximately eight weeks later after diligently investigating infringement, testing products and assessing market impact.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 211.2 RoP; Art. 62 UPCA

  • Necessity and balance of interests favours injunction: Appellant faces price erosion in both cash pay and reimbursement CGM markets, erosion of market share, and long-term harm that is difficult to quantify or reverse.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62(2) UPCA; R. 211.3 RoP
Zurückgewiesene Argumente
Was das Gericht nicht akzeptiert hat — und warum.

  • The GlucoMen iCan does not infringe claim 1 because the event data icons are not displayed on or near the graph line of the timeline graph but in a separate panel/section of the screen.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 69 EPC; claim construction

  • Claims 1 and 14 contain added matter and lack an inventive step, making the patent more likely than not invalid.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 123(2) EPC; Art. 56 EPC

  • Feature 1.7(c) excludes status information provided or overlaid by the receiver unit itself (e.g. battery life data).

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 69 EPC; claim construction

  • The application lacked urgency because Appellant did not act for 1.5 years against the Sinocare iCan i3 (allegedly technically identical) and waited approximately two months after 24 April 2025 before filing.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 211.4 RoP; urgency requirements

  • The preliminary injunction should be limited to the reimbursement market only.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA; proportionality

  • A security for enforcement of EUR 400,000 should be ordered against Appellant under Art. 82(2) UPCA and R. 352 RoP.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 82(2) UPCA; R. 352 RoP

  • The cross-appeal seeking to overturn the first-instance order on urgency grounds should be declared admissible and granted.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 220.1 RoP; R. 237 RoP