UPC CFI 255/2025

At the UPC: IPG Laser GmbH & Co. KG (9 cases)·TRUMPF Laser- und Systemtechnik SE (4 cases)

• 2026-03-16
  Infringement ActionPublic

  Summary: The Düsseldorf Local Division (Panel 1) held that IPG Laser's YLS-AMB dual-beam fibre laser directly infringes apparatus claim 2 and indirectly infringes method claim 1 of EP2624031, granting an injunction (in Germany, France and Italy), recall/removal-from-distribution/destruction, information/accounting, and EUR 115,000 in provisional damages plus EUR 115,000 in provisional cost reimbursement, while dismissing the remainder of the infringement claim (the ancillary remedies sought for components attacked only under the indirect-infringement theory). IPG's counterclaim for revocation of claims 1-3 (UPC_CFI_255/2025) was examined on novelty and inventive step over prior art D1/D3 and dismissed as unfounded, so the patent is maintained as granted; costs of the infringement action were split 10%/90% (claimant/defendant) and the defendant bears all costs of the counterclaim.

  Show the legal issues (7)

  • Claim construction of the switchable multi-clad/dual-beam fibre-laser claims (Anspruch 1 method / Anspruch 2 apparatus), EP2624031
  • Novelty and inventive step of EP2624031 claims 1-3 over D1/D3 (revocation counterclaim), Art. 54/56 EPC
  • Direct infringement (Art. 25(a) UPCA) of apparatus claim 2 by the IPG YLS-AMB dual-beam laser
  • Indirect infringement (Art. 26(1) UPCA) of method claim 1 through offer/supply of a suited-and-intended device
  • Scope of recall / removal-from-distribution-channels / destruction remedies where a component is attacked only under an indirect-infringement theory, Art. 64(2)(b),(d),(e) and 64(4) UPCA
  • Provisional damages and provisional cost reimbursement under R.119 and R.150.2 RoP
  • Recoverable-representation-cost ceiling computed on the combined value of the infringement action and the counterclaim