UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed:

ACT_459987/2023

A SYSTEM COMPRISING A PROSTHETIC VALVE AND A DELIVERY CATHETER

InfringementMain Infringement ActionMunich LDInfringement Action
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

EPC article · 4

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
3(c)jurisdictionBindingThe Unified Patent Court has jurisdiction over acts of infringement committed before the entry into force of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court on 1 June 2023. This is in line with Article 3(c) and 32(1)(a) UPCA.
32(3b)jurisdictionBindingIn accordance with Article 32(3b) of the UPCA, a referral of the counterclaim for revocation to the central division and a continuation of the action for infringement may be made following a decision to this effect.
34jurisdictionBindingArt. 34 UPCA stipulates that injunctive relief, and other corrective measures can be ordered with respect to all contracting member states where the European Patent has effect.
64(4)proportionalityBindingArticle 64(4) of the UPCA explicitly mentions the interests of third parties.

Rules of Procedure · 2

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
105.5jurisdictionBindingSUBJECT-MATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS: Patent infringement – R 105.5
295(c)(i)jurisdictionBindingOnce the central division has delivered its ruling and upheld the patent in an amended form, a stay of the action for infringement may be based exclusively on R. 295(c)(i) or (m) RoP.

UPC (CFI) · 2

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
UPC_CFI_198/2023noveltyBackgroundThe Central Division Section Paris rendered a decision on 19 July 2024 (ACT_551308/2023, CC_584916/2023, CC_585030/2023). The patent was upheld according to auxiliary request 2.
UPC_CFI_198/2023noveltyBackgroundThe Central Division Section Paris rendered a decision on 19 July 2024 (ACT_551308/2023, CC_584916/2023, CC_585030/2023).

UPC Court of Appeal · 1

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
UPC_CoA_457/2024noveltyBackgroundThis decision had been appealed (UPC_CoA_457/2024, UPC_CoA_458/2024 and UPC_CoA_464/2024).

EPO Boards of Appeal · 1

TargetLegal pointStrengthExcerpt
EP 3 583 920inventive stepPersuasivea similar lack of inventive step led the EPO's Board of Appeal to conclude that family member EP 3 583 920 B1 ("EP 920") in the version of auxiliary request 2 (with a virtually identical claim set as EP 825 in the version of Auxiliary Request II) lacked inventive step
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.

Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.