UPC CFI 1901/2026
May 28, 2026·EP2377536 · Methods of Using Sustained Release Aminopyridine Compositions
- Case details
- StatusWritten PhaseActionInfringementCategoryMain infringement action
- Parties
- Claimants
- Merz Pharma FranceOperating co.
- Merz Therapeutics GmbHOperating co.
- Merz Pharmaceuticals LLCOperating co.
Representatives- Laëtitia Bénard-A&O Shearman
- Division
- Paris LD
- Technology
- ChemistryPharmaceuticals
- Language
- English
- First decided
- Jul 30, 2026
- Last decision
- Oct 15, 2026
- EPO Opposition
- Actavis Group PTC ehfAdmissible2013-12-05
- Synthon B.V.Admissible2013-12-06
- neuraxpharm Arzneimittel GmbHAdmissible2013-12-06
| Infringement found | Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|---|
| All UPC | 53% (62/117) | 124 |
| Paris LD | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Camille Lignières | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Carine Gillet | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Samuel Granata | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Rainer Friedrich | — | Locked |
At the UPC: Merz Pharma France (6 cases)·Viatris Santé (6 cases)
This dispute contains 5 other proceedings
UPC CFI 3259/2026·UPC CoA 917/2025·UPC CoA 906/2025·UPC CFI 697/2025·UPC APP 36985/2025
1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
- 2026-10-15InfringementPublic
Summary: Paris Local Division full panel, on Viatris' request, refers the counterclaim for revocation of the SPC/EP2377536 (UPC_CFI_3259/2026) to the Paris Central Division, which is to deal with the stay question, and lets the infringement action continue before the Local Division. No ruling on infringement or validity.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Bifurcation of counterclaim for revocation, Art. 33(3)(b) UPCA and R. 37.2 RoP
- Referral of SPC validity counterclaim to Paris Central Division
- Stay pending French court proceedings (Brussels I recast Art. 29-30)
- Referral to the panel, R. 102 RoP
- 2026-07-30InfringementPublic
Summary: The Paris Local Division rejected in its entirety the preliminary objection raised by Viatris Santé under R. 19.1(a) RoP, which sought a declination of jurisdiction in favour of the Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris on lis pendens grounds and, in the alternative, a stay. The request for a stay under R. 295 RoP was also rejected and costs were reserved to the main proceedings. The Court reasoned that the UPC decision is likely to be handed down before that of the national court and that a stay would unduly delay proceedings.
Show the legal issues (5)
- preliminary objection on jurisdiction (R. 19.1(a) RoP)
- lis pendens under Art. 29 Brussels I recast
- related actions under Art. 30 Brussels I recast
- stay of proceedings (R. 295(b), (l) and (m) RoP)
- French SPC based on a European patent
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| Publication of order | 2026-10-16 | Not public |
| Order | 2026-10-15 | Not public |
| Order | 2026-10-15 | Public |
| Receipt | 2026-09-28 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-09-28 | Not public |
| Submission Claimant | 2026-09-28 | Not public |
| Communication | 2026-09-11 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-09-10 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-09-10 | Not public |
| Exhibit Defendant | 2026-09-10 | Not public |