UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed: Jul 29, 2024

UPC_CFI_448/2024

SINTERED METAL PREPARATION AND ITS USE FOR JOINING COMPONENTS

Parent infringement case:UPC_CFI_114/2024

RevocationCounter Claim for RevocationMunich LDCounter claim for revocationCase Closed
OverviewDecisionsReasoningCitationsDocumentsTimeline
Coverage: Partial.Reasoning extracted with partial coverage — some sections may be incomplete.
Plain-English summary

Heraeus Electronics GmbH & Co. KG brought an infringement action against Vibrantz GmbH for EP 3 215 288 (sintered metal preparation for joining components) at the Munich Local Division; Vibrantz counterclaimed for revocation. The court partially revoked the patent (maintaining amended claims in the order), dismissed the infringement action, and apportioned costs 60% to Heraeus and 40% to Vibrantz. A notable principle established: the binding effect of prior national invalidity judgments on UPC proceedings is determined by national law under Art. 24.1(e) UPCA.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Binding effect of a national revocation judgment on UPC proceedings must be assessed by reference to national law in the absence of specific UPCA provisions

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 24.1(e) UPCA

    Note: Court held that since UPCA contains no special rules on the res judicata effect of national invalidity judgments, national law governs this question.

  • EP 3 215 288 (sintered metal preparation) is partially invalid

    Claimant

    Note: The revocation counterclaim succeeded in part; certain claims were revoked while others were maintained; infringement action was dismissed.

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

  • Private prior use right (in DE, FR, IT, RO) precludes infringement finding

    Respondent

    Reason: The private prior use right arguments were addressed but did not change the overall outcome; infringement action was dismissed on other grounds related to partial invalidity of the patent.

Key legal principles
Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.
Res judicata effect of national invalidity judgments on UPC proceedings governed by national law (Art. 24.1(e) UPCA)Private prior use rights in DE, FR, IT, RO are available defences in UPC infringement proceedingsPartial revocation of patent may result in dismissal of infringement action where remaining valid claims are not infringedCosts apportioned proportionally to partial success: 40% claimant, 60% respondent

Browse other cases on this principle.