UPClytics
EnglishDeutsch
Sign inSign up
View all cases

UPC CFI 202/2024

May 2, 2024·EP3655346 +1 more: DISPENSING APPARATUS

Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Revocation
Category
Main Revocation Action
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Véronique Pede (CAPE IP Law); Camille Vansteenkiste (CAPE IP Law)
Respondents
Reps: Matthew Dixon (Beck Greener LLP); Anna Hatt (Beck Greener LLP); François Herpe (Cornet Vincent Ségurel); Capucine Hamon (Cornet Vincent Ségurel)
Division
Paris CD
Judges
Technology
Consumer Goods · Packaging · Packaging & Conveying
Language
English
First decided
May 29, 2025
Claims
At issueall
Amendedall
Notes: Paris Central Division rejected revocation of EP3655346 (pressure pack dispenser); patent maintained in amended form per First Auxiliary Request after original claim 1 found to lack industrial application.
Decisions
  • 2025-05-29
    Patent amendedRevocation meritsRevocation Action

    The Central Division Paris rejected Lindal's revocation action but maintained EP 3 655 346 B1 as amended by the First Auxiliary Request submitted by the patent proprietor (Rocep-Lusol). The court held that the patent lacked industrial application in its original form but could be maintained in amended form. Claimant (Lindal) bears 70% of costs; defendant (Rocep-Lusol) bears 30%.

    Legal issues:Revocation actionIndustrial application (Article 57 EPC)Claim interpretationUse of drawings in claim interpretationAuxiliary requests
  • 2025-05-29
    Patent amendedRevocation meritsRevocation Action

    The Central Division Paris rejected the revocation action filed by Lindal Dispenser GmbH against Rocep-Lusol Holdings Limited in respect of EP 3 655 346 B1 (a pressure pack dispenser). The patent was maintained in amended form as submitted in the First Auxiliary Request on 26 July 2024 (maintained as EP 1 552 399 in amended form). The Court held that an invention contrary to accepted laws of physics lacks industrial application under Art. 57 EPC. Drawings must be used as explanatory aids but cannot be used to extract a characteristic when contradicted by the description. Costs were apportioned 70% to the claimant and 30% to the defendant. The case value was EUR 1.4 million.

    Legal issues:Lack of industrial application (Art.57 EPC)Claim interpretationUse of drawings in claim interpretationAuxiliary requests procedurePatent limitation during proceedings
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Headnote-and-Keywords2025-05-30Not public
DecisionOutcome2025-05-30Not public
decision2025-05-30Public
Hearing Reference2025-03-27Not public
Hearing Reference2025-03-27Not public
Interim-Procedure-Closure2025-03-06Not public
Summon-Oral-Hearing2025-03-06Not public
rule 1082025-03-06Public
Hearing-Dates2025-03-03Not public
rule 1052025-03-03Public
Hearing reference2025-02-27Not public
Hearing reference2025-02-27Not public
Fix-Interim-Conference-Date2025-02-24Not public
rule 1032025-02-24Public
Interim-Conference-Decision2025-02-03Not public
Written-Procedure-Closure2025-02-03Not public
Hearing-Dates2025-01-16Not public
rule 282025-01-16Public
Comments hearing date2024-12-30Not public
Confirmation of availability for Interim Conference and Oral Hearing2024-12-30Not public
preliminary order2024-12-24Not public
preliminary order2024-12-24Not public
Comments hearing dates2024-12-19Not public
Confirmation of availability for Interim Conference and Oral Hearing2024-12-18Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-12-16Not public
closing workflow2024-12-16Public
preliminary order2024-12-16Not public
Hearing-Dates2024-12-16Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-10-30Not public
Rejoinder to the Reply to the Defence2024-10-30Not public
Receipt2024-10-01Not public
Receipt2024-10-01Not public
Generic procedural application2024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of reply to SoD2024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of exhibit H.12024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of exhibit F.62024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of exhibit H.32024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of exhibit H.22024-09-30Not public
Request confidentiality2024-09-30Not public
Redacted version of exhibit F.72024-09-30Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-09-30Not public
Reply to SoD and defence to the application to amend the patent2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.92024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.122024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.22024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.182024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.12024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.152024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.32024-09-30Not public
Reply to SoD and defence to the application to amend the patent2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.112024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.132024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.182024-09-30Not public
Exhibit E.4.a2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.172024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.9.a2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.12024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.162024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.72024-09-30Not public
Exhibit E.4.b2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.102024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.172024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.122024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.102024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.8.b2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.162024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.62024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.152024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.132024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.62024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.32024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.9.b2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.192024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.142024-09-30Not public
Exhibit H.22024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.8.a2024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.72024-09-30Not public
Exhibit G.112024-09-30Not public
Exhibit F.142024-09-30Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-08-07Not public
Personal ID - Passport2024-08-07Not public
Application for change of representative2024-08-07Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2024-07-30Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-07-26Not public
Exhibit H.42024-07-26Not public
Exhibit H.12024-07-26Not public
Exhibit H.52024-07-26Not public
First Auxiliary Request2024-07-26Not public
Exhibit H.32024-07-26Not public
Third Auxiliary Request2024-07-26Not public
Second Auxiliary Request2024-07-26Not public
STATEMENT OF DEFENCE2024-07-26Not public
Exhibit H.22024-07-26Not public
Panel-Appointment2024-07-19Not public
Acknowledgement of access to case2024-06-19Not public
Notification Of Service2024-06-04Not public
Service effected by baillif - 28.05.20242024-06-04Not public
Letter for Service2024-05-22Not public
Panel-Appointment2024-05-14Not public
epoUploadDocumentsWorkflow2024-05-14Not public
Document from EPO2024-05-13Not public
EPO-Request-for-case-pending2024-05-10Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-05-10Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2024-05-10Not public
Exhibit A.52024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.42024-05-07Not public
Exhibit A.32024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.72024-05-07Not public
Exhibit B.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.62024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit A.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit E.32024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.52024-05-07Not public
Exhibit F.42024-05-07Not public
Exhibit A.42024-05-07Not public
Exhibit B.52024-05-07Not public
Exhibit D.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit E.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.42024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.22024-05-07Not public
Statement for Revocation2024-05-07Not public
Exhibit D.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit B.42024-05-07Not public
Exhibit B.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.62024-05-07Not public
Exhibit F.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit E.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.82024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.52024-05-07Not public
Exhibit C.32024-05-07Not public
SoR_Formal Response to the request for amendments2024-05-07Not public
Exhibit F.52024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.12024-05-07Not public
Exhibit F.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit A.22024-05-07Not public
Exhibit G.32024-05-07Not public
Exhibit F.32024-05-07Not public
Exhibit B.32024-05-07Not public
Formal-checks_Request-for-correction2024-05-06Not public
Exhibit D.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit B.12024-04-30Not public
Statement for Revocation2024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit A.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.52024-04-30Not public
Exhibit E.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit E.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.42024-04-30Not public
Exhibit B.42024-04-30Not public
Exhibit F.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.52024-04-30Not public
Exhibit F.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.42024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit F.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit B.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit B.52024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.62024-04-30Not public
Exhibit A.52024-04-30Not public
Exhibit B.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit A.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit C.22024-04-30Not public
Exhibit F.42024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit A.42024-04-30Not public
Exhibit E.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.82024-04-30Not public
Exhibit A.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit F.52024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.62024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.32024-04-30Not public
Exhibit D.12024-04-30Not public
Exhibit G.72024-04-30Not public
Coverage: Partial.Reasoning extracted with partial coverage — some sections may be incomplete.
Plain-English summary

Lindal Dispenser GmbH brought a revocation action against Rocep-Lusol Holdings Limited's EP 3 655 346 B1, a patent for a pressure pack dispenser for viscous materials. The Central Division Paris rejected the revocation action but maintained the patent only in amended form per Rocep-Lusol's First Auxiliary Request, establishing that an invention violating accepted laws of physics lacks industrial application and that drawings cannot override an unambiguous description. Costs were apportioned 70% to Lindal and 30% to Rocep-Lusol.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Patent as amended by First Auxiliary Request can be maintained (limitations cure original defects)

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 57 EPC; Art. 138 EPC

    Note: Rocep-Lusol's First Auxiliary Request narrowed the claims sufficiently to overcome the industrial-application objection and the revocation action was dismissed on that basis.

  • Drawings cannot be used to extract a claim feature when definitively and unambiguously contradicted by the description

    Respondent

    Note: The court articulated this as a headnote principle and applied it in claim construction, limiting the interpretive weight given to figures.

Rejected arguments
What the court did not agree with — and why.

  • EP 3 655 346 B1 as granted is invalid for lack of industrial application

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 57 EPC

    Reason: The court accepted the invalidity argument in relation to the patent as granted, but the revocation action was dismissed because the patent was maintained in amended form via the First Auxiliary Request rather than fully revoked.

Key legal principles
Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.
An invention contrary to accepted laws of physics lacks industrial application (Art. 57 EPC)Drawings serve as explanatory aids for claim interpretation but cannot override unambiguous descriptionMultiple auxiliary requests must be addressed in the order indicated by the applicant absent contrary instructionsCost apportionment reflects the dynamic where revocation fails only because proprietor amends during proceedings

Browse other cases on this principle.

Claim construction notes

The court held that drawings must always be used as explanatory aids for interpreting claims but cannot be used to extract a claim feature when the description definitively and unambiguously contradicts the drawing. This was applied in construing the pressure pack dispenser's composite piston arrangement.