UPC CFI 324/2024
Jun 17, 2024·EP2839083 +1 more: PILE SHOE
- Case details
- StatusCase ClosedActionInfringementCategoryMain Infringement Action
- Parties
- Division
- Munich LD
- Technology
- Construction · Foundation Systems
- Language
- German
- 2025-06-06Patent amendedInjunction grantedInfringement Action
Infringement action by Tiroler Rohre GmbH (Austria) against SSAB Swedish Steel GmbH and SSAB Europe Oy concerning a driving pile tip device (Rammspitze) and EP 2 839 083 B9. The court found infringement of the patent as amended. It ordered: injunction, recall and destruction of infringing pile tips and moulds, disclosure of information, publication of decision in four trade journals. The invalidity counterclaim against the patent as originally granted was upheld in part (patent amended). Key headnotes: burden of proof for impossibility of infringement lies with defendant; infringement exists even if patented function only occasionally achieved.
Legal issues:Infringement: burden of proof on impossibility defenceInfringement where patented function achieved only occasionallyPatent amendment in invalidity counterclaimRecall and destruction of infringing products
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| DecisionOutcome | 2025-06-06 | Not public |
| Entscheidung | 2025-06-06 | Public |
| Oral Hearing Reference document | 2025-06-06 | Not public |
| Oral Hearing Reference document | 2025-06-06 | Not public |
| Interim-Procedure-Closure | 2025-05-07 | Not public |
| Summon-Oral-Hearing | 2025-05-07 | Not public |
| Terminierung | 2025-05-07 | Public |
| Hearing-Dates | 2025-05-07 | Not public |
| Written-Procedure-Closure | 2025-05-07 | Not public |
| Protokoll interim conference | 2025-05-07 | Public |
| Hearing-Dates | 2025-05-06 | Not public |
| Kurzer Schriftsatz | 2025-04-02 | Not public |
| Terminierung | 2025-03-24 | Public |
| Terminierung | 2025-03-24 | Public |
| Terminierung | 2025-03-24 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2025-01-20 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2025-01-20 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 3 | 2025-01-17 | Not public |
| Duplik - Verletzungsverfahren | 2025-01-17 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 3 | 2025-01-17 | Not public |
| Duplik - Verletzungsklage | 2025-01-17 | Not public |
| Panel-Appointment | 2024-12-04 | Not public |
| Hearing-Dates | 2024-12-03 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-11-22 | Not public |
| Replik und Erwiderung auf Widerklage | 2024-11-22 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-11-22 | Not public |
| Replik und Erwiderung auf Widerklage | 2024-11-22 | Not public |
| Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome | 2024-09-24 | Not public |
| Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome | 2024-09-24 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 2 | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Klageerwiderung | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 1 | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Klageerwiderung | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 1 | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| Anlage MW 2 | 2024-09-17 | Not public |
| epoUploadDocumentsWorkflow | 2024-06-25 | Not public |
| Document from EPO | 2024-06-24 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement of access to case | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Notification Of Service | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Panel-Appointment | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement of access to case | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Notification Of Service | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Panel-Appointment | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| EPO-Request-for-case-pending | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome | 2024-06-19 | Not public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage C | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage P | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage O | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage Q | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage S | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage H | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage A | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage R | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage V | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Klageschrift | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage G | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage B | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage T | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage U | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage I | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage L | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage F | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage D | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage N | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage J | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage M | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage K | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
| Beilage E | 2024-06-17 | Not public |
Tiroler Rohre GmbH (Austria) sued SSAB Swedish Steel GmbH and SSAB Europe Oy for infringement of EP 2 839 083 B9, a patent for a driving pile tip device (Rammspitze) used in foundation pile construction. The Munich Local Division found infringement of the patent as amended pursuant to auxiliary requests, granted an injunction, and ordered recall, destruction and information disclosure; SSAB's invalidity counterclaim was upheld against the original claims but the amended claims were maintained, with costs split 20% claimant and 80% defendants.
The accused pile tip device has the required capability under the patent claim even if the patented function is only occasionally or accidentally achieved
ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 25 UPCA; Art. 54 EPGÜNote: Court held that infringement exists where the device has the required capability; whether the patented effects are regularly, occasionally, or accidentally achieved and whether the user intends to achieve them is irrelevant.
Burden of proof for impossibility of infringement lies with defendants, not the patentee
ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 54 UPCANote: Where defendants argue infringement is impossible due to features outside the patent claim, they bear the burden of proof for that assertion; claimant need not address features outside the claim.
Patent as amended (auxiliary requests) avoids invalidity and is infringed
ClaimantLegal basis: R. 30 RoP; Art. 65 UPCANote: Court accepted patent amendments via auxiliary requests, maintaining the patent in amended form and finding infringement of the amended claims.
Invalidity of EP 2 839 083 B9 as originally granted (revocation counterclaim)
RespondentLegal basis: Art. 65 UPCAReason: Patent was maintained in amended form via auxiliary requests; original invalidity finding did not defeat the infringement claim.
Infringement is impossible due to features outside the patent claim that prevent the patented function from being achieved
RespondentLegal basis: Art. 25 UPCAReason: Defendants bear the burden of proof for this impossibility argument; infringement turns on capability under the claim, not on whether the patented effect is always or ever intended.
Browse other cases on this principle.
The case concerned EP 2 839 083 B9, a pile shoe (Rammspitze) patent. The court's capability-based infringement test focused on whether the challenged pile tip embodied the structural features recited in the amended claims, irrespective of whether concrete poured through the device's channels actually achieved the patented distribution effect in every use.