UPC_CFI_1/2023

Munich Central Division granted Dehns' (a UPC representative firm) request for access to written pleadings and evidence in the concluded Sanofi v. Amgen revocation proceedings under R.262.1(b) RoP. The Court found that since proceedings had concluded, the balance of interests normally favours granting access to third parties with a legitimate general interest.

The Munich Central Division (UPC's first-ever revocation case) revoked European patent EP 3 666 797 B1 (relating to an anti-PCSK9 antibody composition for treating hypercholesterolaemia, owned by Amgen) in its entirety for the territories of 17 UPC Contracting Member States. The patent was found to lack inventive step. All 17 auxiliary requests were also found to lack inventive step. Amgen (defendant/patent proprietor) was ordered to bear Sanofi's legal costs of EUR 1,375,000.

The Munich Central Division issued a procedural order combining two related revocation actions (Sanofi v Amgen and Regeneron v Amgen) into a single proceeding, admitted additional documents into evidence, rejected a request for an interim conference, and set the value of each action at EUR 100 million.

The Munich Central Division judge-rapporteur issued a procedural order in the Sanofi v. Amgen revocation action, declining Sanofi's request to admit supplementary expert declarations filed in response to new points raised in Amgen's rejoinder, noting that the proper course was to raise the matter at the upcoming interim conference.

The Munich Central Division rejected an anonymous individual's R. 262.1(b) RoP application for access to pleadings and evidence filed in Sanofi's revocation action against Amgen (EP patent, case UPC_CFI_1/2023), holding that a personal and professional interest in forming an opinion on patent validity is not a legitimate reason for granting third-party access to the case file.

The Central Division (Munich) rejected Amgen's preliminary objection challenging jurisdiction over Sanofi's revocation action, holding that the UPC Registry functions as a single receiving mailbox for the whole court and that the action was validly filed.

The Central Division (Munich) issued a procedural order admitting Sanofi's supplementary exhibits to the Statement of Claim (filed via generic application) and confirming the date of service of the Statement for Revocation on Amgen.