UPC CFI 440/2023

At the UPC: Seoul Semiconductor Group (29 cases)·Laser Components SAS (2 cases)

• 2025-04-24
  Infringement ActionPublic

  Summary: The Paris Local Division found that Laser Components SAS infringed EP 3 404 726 owned by Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd., ordered corrective measures including withdrawal and destruction of infringing UV-C LED chips from the French market, and directed disclosure of information for damages calculation, while reserving the quantum of damages for a separate procedure.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Patent infringement of UV-C LED chip patent
  • Claim interpretation (mesa indentations, passivation layer openings)
  • Corrective measures (Art. 64 UPCA)
  • Information disclosure for damages calculation
• 2025-02-17
  Infringement ActionPublic

  Summary: The Paris Local Division issued an interim management order following the preparatory conference (R. 105.5 RoP) in the infringement action by Seoul Viosys against Laser Components SAS and Photon Wave Co. concerning EP 3 404 726 (UV LEDs). The order summarised the key contested legal and factual issues (claim interpretation, PKB chip characteristics), fixed the case value at EUR 500,000 (rejecting the defendant's argument for EUR 250,000), and scheduled the oral hearing for 13 March 2025.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Interim management conference order (R. 105.5 RoP)
  • Claim interpretation (contact electrode, bump electrode, passivation layer openings)
  • Case value determination (R. 370.6 / R. 104(i) RoP)
  • Default procedure for absent defendant
• 2024-07-24
  Public

  Summary: The Paris Local Division issued a procedural order addressing the schedule and management of the Seoul Viosys v. Laser Components infringement action, including Photon Wave's intervention and a parallel revocation action at the Central Division.

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • Procedural management
  • Third-party intervention
  • Stay pending parallel revocation action (Rule 118(2)(b) RoP)
• 2024-05-06
  Public

  Summary: Order of the Paris Local Division (full panel) on several procedural applications filed by Photon Wave Co. Ltd. (intervener/third party supporter of defendant Laser Components SAS) and Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd. (claimant) in an infringement action concerning EP 3 404 726. The court: (1) held that Photon Wave had not filed its revocation brief within the deadline set for the party it supports, and rejected its application for extension of that deadline; (2) rejected Photon Wave's request to change the language of proceedings from French to another language, holding that neither the nationality of a party's representative nor of the intervener justifies a language change; (3) rejected Photon Wave's request for an autonomous revocation brief on the basis that an intervener cannot develop claims contrary to those of the party it supports; (4) rejected Seoul Viosys's request for postponement of its reply deadline.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Intervener's limitations: cannot develop claims contrary to supported party (Rule 313 RoP)
  • Deadline for intervener's revocation brief tied to supported party's deadline
  • Language of proceedings: refusal of change based on representative or intervener nationality (Rule 322 RoP)
  • Refusal of extension of deadline for autonomous revocation brief (Rule 9 RoP)
• 2024-03-14
  Public

  Summary: Procedural order (in French) granting Laser Components SAS an extension of the deadline for filing its Statement of Defence in the infringement action brought by Seoul Viosys. The extension was granted due to technical difficulties experienced by the third-party intervener (Photon Wave Co.) in the CMS system and the anticipated filing of a separate invalidity counterclaim requiring coordination.

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • Extension of time period (Rule 9.3 RoP)
  • Third-party intervention (Rule 316.2 RoP)
  • Technical difficulties with CMS
• 2024-02-27
  Public

  Summary: The Paris Local Division refused the defendant Laser Components SAS's request to change the language of proceedings from French to English (the language in which the patent was granted) in Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd v Laser Components SAS. The Court applied R. 322 RoP and Art. 49.4 UPCA, finding that while the plaintiff is Korean and chose French, the defendant is a French company based in France, and neither the representative's nationality nor a forced intervenor's nationality constitutes sufficient grounds of convenience or equity to justify a language change. The request was therefore rejected.

  Show the legal issues (2)

  • Language of proceedings under Art. 49.4 UPCA and R. 322 RoP
  • Change to patent language — grounds of convenience and equity