- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryOther procedural
- Parties
- Claimants
- Edwards Lifesciences CorporationOperating co.
Representatives- Boris Kreye-Bird & Bird LLP
- Elsa Tzschoppe-Bird & Bird LLP
- Bernhard Thumsupporting-Thum & Partner
- Jonas Weickertsupporting-Thum & Partner
- Siddharth Kusumakarsupporting-Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP
- Tessa Waldronsupporting-Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP
- Bryce Matthewsonsupporting-Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP
Respondents- Meril GmbHOperating co.
- Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd.Operating co.
Representatives- Andreas von Falck-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Roman Würtenberger-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Lukas Wollenschlaeger-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Beatrice Wilden-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Alexander Klicznik-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Felipe Zilly-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Peter-Michael Weissesupporting-Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner mbB
- Ole Dirkssupporting-Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner mbB
- Eva Maria Thörnersupporting-Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner mbB
- Division
- Munich LD
- Technology
- InstrumentsMedical technology
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Nov 15, 2024
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Munich LD | Locked |
| Judge Matthias Zigann | Locked |
| Judge Margot Kokke | Locked |
| Judge Tobias Pichlmaier | Locked |
| Judge Stefan Wilhelm | Locked |
At the UPC: Edwards Lifesciences Group (57 cases)·Meril Group (60 cases)
This dispute contains 20 other proceedings
UPC CoA 166/2025·UPC CoA 21/2025·UPC CoA 27/2025·UPC CFI 815/2024·UPC APP 60159/2024 and 15 more
5 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
UPC CFI 202/2025·UPC CFI 674/2024·UPC CoA 530/2024·UPC CoA 464/2024·UPC CFI 255/2023
- 2024-11-15
Summary: Procedural order from Munich Local Division (full panel) in the infringement proceedings of Edwards Lifesciences Corporation against Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. concerning EP 3 646 825. Defendants requested the court to ask the European Commission for information about antitrust investigations against Edwards. The panel declined the request at this stage as premature and disproportionate, noting that the merits (infringement and validity) would be assessed at the oral hearing first.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Request to ask European Commission about antitrust investigation
- TAVI/heart valve patent infringement
- Abuse of dominant market position and SEP-like patent strategy
- A3D10419D317AD1C078DD79A56F82DD7_en.pdf2024-11-15EN