UPC APP 57843/2024
EP3918974 Unitary patent · COMPUTERIZED REFRACTION AND ASTIGMATISM DETERMINATION
- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryOther procedural
- Parties
- Respondents
- Easee B.V.Operating co.
- Yves PrevooOther / unknown
- Easee Holding B.V.Operating co.
Representatives- Yves Prevoo
- Division
- Hamburg LD
- Technology
- InstrumentsOptics · Medical technology
- Language
- —
- First decided
- May 30, 2025
- EPO Opposition
- Easee Health B.V.Withdrawn2024-09-13
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Hamburg LD | Locked |
| Judge Sabine Klepsch | Locked |
| Judge Stefan Schilling | Locked |
| Judge Mojca Mlakar | Locked |
| Judge Steven Kitchen | Locked |
At the UPC: Visibly Inc. (9 cases)·Easee B.V. (9 cases)
This dispute contains 6 other proceedings
UPC CoA 542/2025·UPC CoA 526/2025·UPC CFI 14/2025·UPC CFI 525/2024·UPC APP 26135/2025 and 1 more
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: Hamburg LD·2024
- 2025-05-30
Summary: Final order of Hamburg Local Division in Visibly Inc. v Easee B.V. / Easee Holding B.V. / Yves Prevoo (EP 3 918 974) ordering the defendants (as counterclaimants for revocation) to provide joint security of EUR 75,000 for the claimant's legal costs, pursuant to Art. 69(4) UPCA and R. 158 RoP. The court held that Art. 69(4) UPCA does not oblige the defendant to provide security in the infringement action, but a claimant may request security from a defendant acting as counterclaimant in revocation proceedings.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Security for costs under Art. 69(4) UPCA / R. 158 RoP
- Obligation to provide security: scope (defendant as counterclaimant only)
- Balance between claimant's security interest and defendant's right to effective remedy
- C4A862FFC3271D0632883F46875A41E2_en.pdf2025-05-30EN