UPClytics
EnglishDeutsch
Sign inSign up
View all cases

UPC CFI 106/2025

Feb 28, 2025·EP3156843: DEVICE AND METHOD FOR THREE-DIMENSIONAL RECONSTRUCTION OF THE HEAD AND BODY

Parent infringement case:UPC CFI 559/2024

Case details
Status
Oral Phase
Action
Counterclaim for revocation
Category
Counter Claim for Revocation
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Felix Klopmeier (Lang & Rahmann Rechtsanwälte PartG mbB); null (Michalski, Hüttermann & Partner)
Respondents
Reps: Miriam Kiefer, Ll.m. (Kather Augenstein); Benjamin Pesch (Kather Augenstein); Benedikt Walesch, Ll.m. (Kather Augenstein); Bernhard Thum (Thum & Partner)
Division
Dusseldorf LD
Judges
Technology
Medical Devices · Imaging · Computing & AI
Language
German
First decided
Apr 23, 2026
Claims
At issue1, 2, 3, 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
Maintained1, 14
Infringed1, 14
Notes: The court found claims 1 and 14 (independent claims) directly infringed in their literal scope. Dependent claims 2, 3, 8, 11, 15, 16, 17, and 18 were addressed only as 'insbesondere wenn' (especially if) requests that were not decided in the operative part. The counterclaim for revocation of all claims 1-18 was dismissed.
Decisions
  • 2026-04-23
    Permanent injunctionRevocation meritsCounterclaim for revocation

    The UPC Local Division Düsseldorf found that EP 3 156 843 (a stereophotogrammetry device and method for 3D body reconstruction) was directly infringed by the respondents' Canfield Vectra H2 imaging system in Belgium, France, Italy, and the Netherlands. The court granted an injunction, recall, removal from distribution channels, disclosure of information, provisional damages of EUR 20,000, and a declaration of liability for further damages, while dismissing the defendants' counterclaim for revocation in its entirety.

    Legal issues:Infringement of claims 1 and 14 of EP 3 156 843 by Canfield Vectra H2 stereophotogrammetry systemTerritorial scope of UPC injunction under Art. 34 UPCA including 'carve out' of Germany due to parallel German proceedingsClaim construction: whether dual optics require two separate optical systems without moving partsClaim construction: whether the signalling of target distance requires two temporally separate stepsValidity of EP 3 156 843: lack of inventive step counterclaim by respondentsStanding/passive legitimation of Defendant 1 (German subsidiary) for acts in other contracting member statesLimitation/prescription under Art. 72 UPCA for damages and ancillary claimsProvisional damages under R. 119 RoPProvisional reimbursement of costs under R. 150.2 RoPSecurity for enforcement under Art. 82(2) UPCAConfidentiality order as condition precedent to disclosure obligation
    Damages: 20,000
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Receipt2026-05-18Not public
Cover sheet2026-05-18Not public
Exhibit Applicant2026-05-18Not public
Application document Applicant2026-05-18Not public
action.phaseChange.caseClose2026-04-23Not public
action.issueDecision.decision2026-04-23Not public
Decision2026-04-23Public
Hearing recording reference document2026-03-13Not public
Receipt2026-03-11Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-11Not public
Document Claimant2026-03-11Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-11Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-11Not public
Receipt2026-03-09Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-09Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-03-09Not public
Further pleadings2026-03-09Not public
Receipt2026-03-09Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-09Not public
Document2026-03-09Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-09Not public
Order2026-03-09Public
action.phaseChange.oralPhaseOpen2026-03-06Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-06Not public
Order2026-03-06Public
action.phaseChange.interimPhaseOpen2026-02-20Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-02-12Not public
Order2026-02-12Public
action.summons.oralHearing2025-12-11Not public
Summons2025-12-11Not public
Cover2025-08-28Not public
2025-08-28 Duplik Canfield im Verfahren zur Aenderung des Patents_signed2025-08-28Not public
Cover2025-07-28Not public
Replik Antrag auf Änderung des Patents2025-07-28Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-28Not public
Duplik Nichtigkeitswiderklage2025-07-28Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-28Not public
Duplik Nichtigkeitswiderklage2025-07-28Not public
Panel-Appointment2025-07-11Not public
Hearing-Dates2025-07-02Not public
Terminbestimmung Widerklage2025-07-02Public
Hearing-Dates2025-07-02Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_R_32_Erwiderung_Canfield_auf_Hilfsantrag_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_R_32_Erwiderung_Canfield_auf_Hilfsantrag_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_R_32_Erwiderung_Canfield_auf_Hilfsantrag_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_R_32_Erwiderung_Canfield_auf_Hilfsantrag_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_R_32_Erwiderung_Canfield_auf_Hilfsantrag_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_Replik_Nichtigkeitswiderklage_Canfield_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-07-01Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_19_-_en2025-07-01Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_20_-_en2025-07-01Not public
2025-06-30_Replik_Nichtigkeitswiderklage_Canfield_signed.pdf2025-07-01Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_21_-_en2025-07-01Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-04-29Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-04-29Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-04-28Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 62025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 72025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 22025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 82025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 52025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 32025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 102025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 42025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 92025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 112025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 12025-04-28Not public
Erwiderung auf Nichtigkeitswiderklage2025-04-28Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-04-28Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 42025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 92025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 82025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 72025-04-28Not public
Erwiderung auf Nichtigkeitswiderklage2025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 102025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 52025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 12025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 22025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 62025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 112025-04-28Not public
Anlage LRN 32025-04-28Not public
Hilfsantrag Patent Anspruch 12025-04-28Not public
Document from EPO2025-03-05Not public
communicationCheck2025-03-05Not public
Document from EPO2025-03-05Not public
communicationCheck2025-03-05Not public
Document from EPO2025-03-04Not public
Notification Of Service2025-03-04Not public
Zustellung CC an Klaegervetreter2025-03-04Not public
Acknowledgement of access to case2025-03-04Not public
Letter-for-Service2025-03-03Not public
Panel-Appointment2025-03-03Not public
EPO-Request-for-case-pending2025-03-03Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-03-03Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-03-03Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_06_-de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_13_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_03_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_11_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_16_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_17_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_02_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_12_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_01_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_07_-_fr2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_08_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_10_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_18_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_09_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_04_-_en2025-02-28Not public
2025-02-28_Nichtigkeitswiderklage_signed2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_15_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_05_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_14_-_en2025-02-28Not public
Anlage_KAP_NWK_07a_-_de2025-02-28Not public
Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • An infringing act established in one Contracting Member State (Germany, even under a procedural 'carve out') is sufficient to issue an injunction covering all Contracting Member States where the patent is in force under Art. 34 UPCA

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 34 UPCA

  • The dual optics feature of claim 1 does not require two separate optical systems without moving parts; the patent's teaching exploits depth of field and claim 1 does not exclude moving parts

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 69 EPC / claim construction principles

  • Convergence of light beams at the target distance constitutes the required 'signalling' under claim 1 without a temporally separate second step

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 69 EPC / claim construction

  • Infringement of claims 1 and 14 by Canfield Vectra H2, including use of the method in clinical study support and training

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 25(a) and 25(b) UPCA

  • No prescription under Art. 72 UPCA because claimant only acquired knowledge of infringing acts in July/August 2020 (when infringement analysis and warning letter were issued)

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 72 UPCA

  • Provisional damages of EUR 20,000 are warranted under R. 119 RoP to cover anticipated costs of the quantum proceedings

    ClaimantLegal basis: R. 119 RoP; Art. 68 UPCA

  • Provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 90,000 for the counterclaim for revocation is justified at 50% of the reimbursement ceiling

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 69(1) UPCA; R. 150.2 RoP
Rejected arguments
What the court did not agree with — and why.

  • Lack of inventive step of EP 3 156 843 based on multiple prior art combinations including Wolf 'Elements of Photogrammetry', VECTRA H1 User Guide, WO 2010/012722, WO 2010/097572, and related art

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 138(1)(a) EPC; Art. 65 UPCA

  • Claim 1 requires dual optics without moving parts and with two fully separate optical systems

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 69 EPC / claim construction

  • Signalling must be a distinct temporally separate step following establishment of target distance

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 69 EPC / claim construction

  • Claimant lacked passive standing against Defendant 1 for acts in non-German contracting member states because only German infringement was alleged and Germany was carved out

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 34 UPCA

  • Injunction should be territorially limited per defendant to countries where that defendant's infringing acts were individually proven

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 34 UPCA; UPC_CFI_440/2023

  • Claims for damages and ancillary relief accruing before 26 September 2019 are time-barred under Art. 72 UPCA

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 72 UPCA

  • Enforcement should be stayed pending provision of a bank guarantee of EUR 1,800,000 due to catastrophic potential harm to respondents

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 82(2) UPCA; R. 352.1 RoP

  • Disclosure obligation should be subject to a confidentiality order restricting access to claimant's legal representatives and one non-sales employee

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 67 UPCA

  • Three US family patents were held invalid by the PTAB in IPR proceedings on substantially the same prior art, indicating the patent lacks inventive step

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 138(1)(a) EPC