UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed: Mar 18, 2025

UPC_CFI_213/2025

SURGICAL, TORQUE-TRANSMITTING INSTRUMENT INCLUDING ASSOCIATED TOOL

Provisional measuresProvisional MeasuresDusseldorf LDProvisional measuresCase Closed
OverviewDecisionsReasoningCitationsDocumentsTimeline
Coverage: Partial.Reasoning extracted with partial coverage — some sections may be incomplete.
Plain-English summary

Aesculap AG obtained a preliminary injunction from the Düsseldorf Local Division against Shanghai International Holding Corporation GmbH (Europe) for infringement of EP 2 892 442 B1 (surgical torque-transmitting instrument) covering Germany and France. The decision establishes two important procedural principles: where a defendant notifies non-appearance at the oral hearing in PI proceedings, the Court proceeds to a full merits decision rather than a default judgment; and a defendant that fails to specifically rebut individual factual allegations supported by concrete evidence will be treated as having conceded them under R. 171.2 RoP.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Defendant's failure to appear at oral hearing despite giving advance notice means Court proceeds on merits as if defendant were present, not restricted to default judgment

    ClaimantLegal basis: R. 116 RoP; R. 210.3 RoP

    Note: Court held that where defendant informs registry it will not appear, it is treated as relying only on its written submissions and the Court decides on the merits in PI proceedings.

  • General denial of infringement allegations without substantive engagement, where applicant has provided specific factual basis, does not constitute effective contest under R. 171.2 RoP

    ClaimantLegal basis: R. 171.2 RoP

    Note: Court held that where an applicant substantiates infringement with specific facts, the defendant must specifically dispute each allegation; mere statements about burden of proof result in the factual allegations being deemed undisputed.

  • Infringement of EP 2 892 442 B1 (surgical torque-transmitting instrument) by defendant's products in Germany and France

    ClaimantLegal basis: EP2892442B1

    Note: Preliminary injunction granted against Shanghai International Holding Corporation GmbH in Germany and France with penalty payments up to EUR 20,000 per day for internet offers.

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

  • Remaining aspects of application (not specified in available excerpt)

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 62 UPCA

    Reason: Part of the provisional measures application was rejected; specific grounds not captured in the available excerpt.

Key legal principles
Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.
non-appearance at oral hearing in PI proceedings: merits decision not limited to default judgmentduty to substantively contest specific factual allegations under R. 171.2 RoPgeneral denial insufficient where applicant provides specific supporting factscontested facts deemed undisputed if defendant fails to specifically deny them

Browse other cases on this principle.

Claim construction notes

The injunction order reproduces the technical claim features of EP 2 892 442 B1 in German, covering the torque-transmitting tool with functional sections for torque transmission, axial locking, and insertion aid arranged in specified axial relationship. No specific disputed claim terms are identified in the available excerpt.