UPClytics
ENDE
Sign inStart trial
View all cases

UPC CFI 50/2024

Feb 7, 2024·EP3356109 · FOAM RESIN STRUCTURAL PART FOR A FRAME OF A VEHICLE AND PRODUCTION METHOD THEREFOR

Action number: ACT 6665/2024

Follow
Case details
Status
Case Closed (Patent infringed)
Action
Infringement
Category
Main infringement action
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Dusseldorf LD
Judges
Technology
  • Mechanical engineering
    Other special machines
Language
German
First decided
Apr 10, 2025
How this compares
The court's record for this kind of case, counted in first-instance rulings. A figure in brackets is the number of rulings a rate rests on.
Infringement foundMedian days to first decision
All UPC53% (62/117)124
Dusseldorf LDLockedLocked
Judge Ronny ThomasLockedLocked
Judge Edger BrinkmanLockedLocked
Judge Berenice ThomLockedLocked
Judge Graham AshleyLockedLocked

At the UPC: Yellow Sphere Innovations GmbH (9 cases)·Knaus Tabbert AG (8 cases)

Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patent

This dispute contains 7 other proceedings

UPC CoA 157/2026·UPC CoA 413/2025·UPC CFI 411/2025·UPC CFI 368/2025·UPC CoA 365/2025 and 2 more

1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

UPC CFI 1497/2025

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Dusseldorf LD·2024

Decisions
  • 2025-04-10
    Infringement ActionPublic

    Summary: Final decision on the merits from the Düsseldorf Local Division (UPC_CFI_50/2024) delivered on 10 April 2025. The Court found that Knaus Tabbert AG infringed EP 3 356 109 B1 (product-by-process claims relating to a structural component) and granted an injunction, recall from distribution channels, definitive removal, and destruction of infringing products. The revocation counterclaim was dismissed. Provisional damages of EUR 100,000 were awarded, with further damages to be determined. The revocation counterclaim and third-party counterclaim were dismissed. Costs were apportioned 75% to Knaus Tabbert and 12.5% each to the claimants.

    Show the legal issues (6)
    • Product-by-process claims
    • Infringement
    • Revocation counterclaim dismissed
    • Third-party counterclaim dismissed
    • Compensation for pre-grant use (Art. 67 EPC)
    • Damages
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Communication2026-10-15Not public
Receipt2026-10-15Not public
Cover sheet2026-10-15Not public
Document Claimant2026-10-15Not public
Communication2026-10-07Not public
Receipt2026-10-07Not public
Cover sheet2026-10-07Not public
Application document Claimant2026-10-07Not public
Receipt2026-09-22Not public
Cover sheet2026-09-22Not public
Application document Defendant2026-09-22Not public
Receipt2026-09-08Not public
Cover sheet2026-09-08Not public
Application document Applicant2026-09-08Not public
Receipt2026-08-25Not public
Cover sheet2026-08-25Not public
Application document Claimant2026-08-25Not public
Cover sheet2025-10-15Not public
Application2025-10-15Not public
Receipt2025-10-15Not public
Cover sheet2025-10-09Not public
Other document2025-10-09Not public
Receipt2025-10-09Not public
Cover sheet2025-09-30Not public
Application2025-09-30Not public
Exhibit2025-09-30Not public
Receipt2025-09-30Not public
Communication2025-09-29Not public
Other Documents2025-09-29Not public
Other Documents2025-09-29Not public
Gelegenheit zur Stellungnahme2025-09-16Not public
Receipt2025-09-16Not public
Schriftsatz2025-09-16Not public
Anlage ZV32025-09-16Not public
Anlage ZV12025-09-16Not public
Anlage ZV22025-09-16Not public
Receipt2025-06-11Not public
Schriftsatz2025-06-11Not public
Entscheidung anonymisiert2025-04-10Not public
Headnote-and-Keywords2025-04-10Not public
DecisionOutcome2025-04-10Not public
Entscheidung2025-04-10Public
Entscheidung2025-04-10Not public
Verlegung Termin zur Verkündung einer Entscheidung2025-03-28Public
6665_2024_OH_DUS-LOC_UPC202502130930AM_S022025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UPC202502130930AM/S032025-02-18Not public
6665_2024_OH_DUS-LOC_UPC202502130930AM_S022025-02-18Not public
6665-2024_OH_DUS-LOC_UPC202502130930AM_S012025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UPC202502130930AM/S032025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UUPC202502130930AM/S052025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UPC202502130930AM/S042025-02-18Not public
6665-2024_OH_DUS-LOC_UPC202502130930AM_S012025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UPC202502130930AM/S042025-02-18Not public
6665-2024/OH/DUS-LOC/UUPC202502130930AM/S052025-02-18Not public
Interim-Procedure-Closure2025-02-10Not public
Summon-Oral-Hearing2025-02-10Not public
Ladung zur mündlichen Verhandlung2025-02-10Public
Hearing-Dates2025-02-10Not public
rop26b2025-02-10Not public
Stellungnahme2025-02-10Not public
rop26c2025-02-10Not public
rop26d2025-02-10Not public
rop272025-02-10Not public
rop26a2025-02-10Not public
rop302025-02-10Not public
rop322025-02-10Not public
rop242025-02-10Not public
rop292025-02-10Not public
rop282025-02-10Not public
rop312025-02-10Not public
rop252025-02-10Not public
AnlageK272025-02-10Not public
Schriftsatz2025-02-10Not public
Schriftsatz2025-02-10Not public
AnlageK272025-02-10Not public
Anordnung zur Vorlage von Unterlagen2025-02-07Public
Anordnung im Zwischenverfahren2025-02-03Public
Abschluss des schriftlichen Verfahrens2025-01-29Public
Written-Procedure-Closure2025-01-29Not public
Hearing-Dates2025-01-08Not public
Ladung zur mündlichen Verhandlung2025-01-08Public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-09-10Not public
rop212024-09-10Not public
WK352024-09-10Not public
WK42024-09-10Not public
rop222024-09-10Not public
WK372024-09-10Not public
WK382024-09-10Not public
Duplik2024-09-10Not public
WK402024-09-10Not public
rop232024-09-10Not public
WK362024-09-10Not public
ropZA32024-09-10Not public
WK392024-09-10Not public
Preliminary_Objection_DecisionOutcome2024-08-15Not public
Information R. 20.2 VerfO2024-08-15Public
Hearing-Dates2024-08-15Not public
Bestimmung Termin zur mündlichen Verhandlung R. 28 VerfO2024-08-15Public
Stellungnahme2024-08-14Not public
Anhörung R. 28 VerfO2024-08-09Not public
Anhörung R. 28 VerfO2024-08-09Not public
Hearing-Dates2024-08-09Not public
Panel-Appointment2024-08-07Not public
Anordnung R. 37.2 VerfO2024-08-05Public
Anordnung R. 37.2 VerfO2024-08-05Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-07-30Not public
Schließung Workflow2024-07-30Public
Stellungnahme2024-07-29Not public
Anhörung R. 37.2 VerfO2024-07-22Not public
Aufforderung Verwendung Workflow2024-07-10Not public
Template-Order2024-07-10Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-07-10Not public
Schließung Workflow2024-07-10Public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-07-10Not public
Schriftsatz2024-07-10Not public
K172024-07-10Not public
K202024-07-10Not public
K182024-07-10Not public
K192024-07-10Not public
K212024-07-10Not public
Receipt2024-07-10Not public
Receipt2024-07-10Not public
Hilfsantraege2024-07-10Not public
Schriftsatz2024-07-10Not public
K232024-07-10Not public
Schriftsatz2024-07-10Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2024-05-24Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop62024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop132024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop19-12024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop19-22024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop112024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop82024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop42024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop122024-05-23Not public
Anlage WK222024-05-23Not public
Klageerwiderung2024-05-23Not public
Anlage ropZA12024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop142024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop172024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop92024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop162024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop202024-05-23Not public
Anlage ropZA22024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop152024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop182024-05-23Not public
Anlage WK162024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop72024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop102024-05-23Not public
Anlage rop52024-05-23Not public
Anlage WK182024-05-23Not public
Anlage WK172024-05-23Not public
Schriftsatz 9.4.2024-04-09Not public
Schriftsatz 9.4.2024-04-09Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-03-27Not public
Schließung Workflow2024-03-27Public
Gelegenheit zur Ergänzung der Erwiderung auf den Einspruch2024-03-27Not public
commentPreliminaryObjection2024-03-22Not public
Schriftsatz 22.3.2024-03-22Not public
Receipt2024-03-20Not public
Ergaenzung Einspruch2024-03-19Not public
preliminaryObjection2024-03-13Not public
Anlage rop 12024-03-12Not public
Anlage rop 32024-03-12Not public
Anlage rop 22024-03-12Not public
Einspruch2024-03-12Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-03-06Not public
Bestellungsschriftsatz zur Akte und Schließung Workflow2024-03-06Public
Bestellungsschriftsatz zur Akte und Schließung Workflow2024-03-06Not public
Bestellungsschriftsatz zur Akte und Schließung Workflow2024-03-06Not public
Receipt2024-03-05Not public
Bestellungsschriftsatz und Regel 9 Antrag2024-03-04Not public
Acknowledgement of access to case2024-03-01Not public
Notification Of Service2024-02-28Not public
Zustelldaten2024-02-28Not public
epoUploadDocumentsWorkflow2024-02-19Not public
Document from EPO2024-02-19Not public
Letter for Service2024-02-08Not public
Panel-Appointment2024-02-08Not public
EPO-Request-for-case-pending2024-02-08Not public
Receipt2024-02-08Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2024-02-08Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-02-06Not public
Anlage K14-12024-02-06Not public
Klageschrift06022024-02-06Not public
Anlage K112024-02-06Not public
Anlage K52024-02-06Not public
Anlage K42024-02-06Not public
Anlage K92024-02-06Not public
Anlage K12024-02-06Not public
Anlage K102024-02-06Not public
Anlage K132024-02-06Not public
Anlage K152024-02-06Not public
Anlage K62024-02-06Not public
Anlage K82024-02-06Not public
Anlage K122024-02-06Not public
Anlage K162024-02-06Not public
Anlage K72024-02-06Not public
Anlage K32024-02-06Not public
Anlage K22024-02-06Not public
Anlage K14-22024-02-06Not public
Coverage: Partial.Reasoning extracted with partial coverage — some sections may be incomplete.
Plain-English summary

Erwin Härtwich and Yellow Sphere Innovations GmbH sued Knaus Tabbert AG before the Düsseldorf Local Division for infringement of EP 3 356 109 B1, a product-by-process patent for a foam resin structural part used in vehicle frames. The court found infringement, granted an injunction, ordered recall and removal from distribution channels, destruction of infringing products, and awarded EUR 100,000 in preliminary damages, while dismissing both the revocation counterclaim and the third-party counterclaim. The court also held that UPC jurisdiction covers Art. 67 EPC compensation for use during the patent application's publication period.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Product-by-process claims cover products with the technical properties conferred by the specified manufacturing process, regardless of how the infringer manufactures the product

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 25 UPCA; German patent law on product-by-process claims

    Note: The court held that the decisive question for product-by-process claims is how the skilled person understands the manufacturing process indications and what conclusions they draw for the technical properties of the resulting product; Knaus Tabbert's structural foam components were found to embody these properties.

  • UPC has jurisdiction over compensation for use of published EP application (Art. 67 EPC period)

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 32(1)(f) UPCA; Art. 24(1)(c) UPCA; Art. 67 EPC

    Note: The court held that compensation for use during the application publication period falls within UPC jurisdiction, applying Art. 67 EPC as national law on the basis of Art. 24(1)(c) UPCA since no unified rule exists. Claimants were required to plead the conditions for each individual member state.

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

  • Patent EP 3 356 109 is invalid (counterclaim for revocation)

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 65 UPCA

    Reason: The revocation counterclaim was dismissed; the patent was upheld.

  • Third-party counterclaim (Dritt-Widerklage) against Alexander Christ should succeed

    Respondent

    Reason: The third-party counterclaim was dismissed.

  • Software-based deactivation of infringing function is an alternative to destruction

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 64 UPCA

    Reason: The court ordered destruction rather than software-based deactivation, finding that deactivation could only be accepted if it were certain that the product could not be re-enabled into an infringing state.

Key legal principles
Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.
product-by-process claim construction: technical properties conferred by process are decisiveUPC jurisdiction over Art. 67 EPC compensation for use during application publication perioddestruction as corrective measure; software deactivation insufficient unless re-enablement impossiblecosts apportionment where both parties partially succeed

Browse other cases on this principle.

Claim construction notes

For product-by-process claims, the court applied a construction focused on what technical properties the claimed manufacturing process confers on the resulting product. The skilled person's understanding of the manufacturing process description and the resulting structural/material properties of the foam resin structural part is the decisive interpretive question, not the specific process steps as such.