UPC CFI 485/2025
Jun 19, 2025·EP2401365 · REENGINEERING MRNA PRIMARY STRUCTURE FOR ENHANCED PROTEIN PRODUCTION
- Case details
- StatusCase Closed (Patent revoked)ActionCounterclaim for revocationCategoryCounterclaim for revocation
- Parties
- Claimants
- Pfizer Inc.Operating co.
- Pfizer Manufacturing Belgium NVOperating co.
- Pfizer SASOperating co.
- Pfizer ABOperating co.
Representatives- Tobias J. Hessel-Clifford Chance Partnerschaft mbB
- Christine Kanz-Hoyng Rokh Monegier
Respondents- Promosome LLCNPE
- The Scripps Research InstituteUniversity / research
Representatives- Georg Rauh-Vossius & Partner
- Division
- Munich LD
- Technology
- ChemistryBiotechnology
- Language
- English
- First decided
- Jul 7, 2026
| Patent revoked | Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|---|
| All UPC | 37% (34/91) | 124 |
| Munich LD | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Daniel Voss | Locked | Locked |
| Judge András Kupecz | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Georg Werner | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Martin Schmidt | Locked | Locked |
At the UPC: Pfizer Group (31 cases)·Promosome LLC (15 cases)
This dispute contains 11 other proceedings
UPC CoA 146/2026·UPC CoA 148/2026·UPC CFI 2819/2026·UPC CFI 2821/2026·UPC CFI 846/2024 and 6 more
2 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
- 2026-07-07Counterclaim for revocationPublic
Summary: The Local Division Munich revoked European patent EP 2 401 365 in its entirety with effect to Germany, France and Sweden, finding claim 1 as granted lacks novelty over prior art D1 (WO 91/01374) and D2 (Matsuda et al. 2006), and all 25 auxiliary requests invalid. The infringement action brought by Promosome LLC against BioNTech/Pfizer was dismissed both because the patent is invalid and because the claimant failed to sufficiently substantiate that the attacked Comirnaty embodiments practised the claimed method of mutating actual secondary initiation codons.
Show the legal issues (7)
- Standing to sue — whether Promosome LLC holds an exclusive licence under Art. 47(2) UPCA sufficient to bring infringement proceedings
- Temporal jurisdiction — whether the UPC has competence over acts of infringement committed before 1 June 2023 (Art. 28 VCLT / Art. 32 UPCA)
- Claim construction — whether 'secondary initiation codon' in claim 1 requires an actual (functional) codon at which protein synthesis initiates, or merely a putative/potential codon
- Lack of novelty of claim 1 over D2 (Matsuda et al. 2006, RNA) and D1 (WO 91/01374) — enabling disclosure of prior art for novelty
- Infringement — whether Comirnaty mRNA vaccines practise the claimed method of mutating actual secondary initiation codons versus codon optimisation
- Validity of 25 auxiliary requests — lack of novelty (AR1, AR3, AR5), added matter (AR2), lack of inventive step (AR1, AR3, AR4), partial-problem approach for AR4 combining secondary-initiation-codon mutation and miRNA-binding-site mutation
- Admissibility of late-filed evidence (exhibits VB37, VB38) and Rule 36 RoP further written pleadings
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| Decision | 2026-09-28 | Public |
| Communication | 2026-08-25 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-08-05 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-08-05 | Not public |
| Application document Applicant | 2026-08-05 | Not public |
| Decision | 2026-07-07 | Public |
| Case closed | 2026-07-07 | Not public |
| Decision | 2026-07-07 | Not public |
| Decision | 2026-07-07 | Not public |
| Decision | 2026-07-07 | Not public |