UPClytics
EnglishDeutsch
Sign inSign up
View all cases

UPC CFI 650/2024

Oct 31, 2024·EP2519412: MOTORCYCLE TYRE AND PAIR OF MOTORCYCLE TYRES

Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Provisional measures
Category
Provisional Measures
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Matteo Orsingher; Davide Graziano; Federica Franchetti
Division
Milan LD
Judges
Technology
Automotive
Language
Italian
First decided
Nov 5, 2024
Decisions
  • 2024-11-05
    PI grantedPreliminary injunctionApplication for provisional measures

    The Milan Local Division granted Pirelli an ex-parte provisional measure ordering seizure of infringing motorcycle tyres (EP 2 519 412 B1) exhibited by Tianjin Kingtyre and Kingtyre Deutschland at the EICMA 2024 international motorcycle fair in Milan, with a review right for the defendants within 30 days.

    Legal issues:ex-parte provisional measures at trade fair Art. 62 UPCAseizure of infringing products R.275-276 RoPproportionality in execution
  • 2024-11-05
    PI grantedPreliminary injunctionApplication for provisional measures

    Milan Local Division (5 November 2024) granted an ex parte seizure and protective order against Tianjin Kingtyre Group Co. Ltd and Kingtyre Deutschland GmbH at the EICMA 2024 tyre fair in Milan. Order was served by bailiff at the exhibition and immediately enforceable. Defendants may seek review within 30 days. Main proceedings must commence within 31 calendar days.

    Legal issues:Ex parte provisional measuresTrade fair seizure at EICMAImmediate enforceabilityTime limit for main proceedings (R. 213.1 RoP)
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Receipt2024-11-11Not public
nomina custode2024-11-11Not public
Notice of Provisional measures and instructions for access to proceedings2024-11-05Not public
Notice of Provisional measures and instructions for access to proceedings2024-11-05Not public
Measures_DecisionOutcome_Notification.pdf2024-11-05Not public
seizure inaudita altera parte2024-11-05Public
Nota integrativa Pirelli c. Kingtyre2024-11-03Not public
rule 209 para 4 ROP2024-10-31Not public
Panel-Appointment2024-10-31Not public
Application-For-Measures-Receipt2024-10-31Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2024-10-31Not public
Application-For-Measures-Acknowledgement2024-10-31Not public
doc. 192024-10-31Not public
Procura alle liti2024-10-31Not public
doc. 172024-10-31Not public
doc. 42024-10-31Not public
doc. 52024-10-31Not public
doc. 32024-10-31Not public
doc. 72024-10-31Not public
doc. 102024-10-31Not public
doc. 132024-10-31Not public
doc. 92024-10-31Not public
doc. 12024-10-31Not public
doc. 222024-10-31Not public
doc. 202024-10-31Not public
doc. 112024-10-31Not public
doc. 212024-10-31Not public
doc. 152024-10-31Not public
doc. 162024-10-31Not public
doc. 182024-10-31Not public
doc. 142024-10-31Not public
doc. 22024-10-31Not public
241030_Ricorso Pirelli c. Kingtyre2024-10-31Not public
doc. 232024-10-31Not public
doc. 82024-10-31Not public
doc. 122024-10-31Not public
doc. 62024-10-31Not public
Coverage: Partial.Reasoning extracted with partial coverage — some sections may be incomplete.
Plain-English summary

Pirelli Tyre S.p.A. obtained an ex parte seizure and delivery order from the Milan Local Division against Tianjin Kingtyre Group Co. Ltd. and Kingtyre Deutschland GmbH concerning motorcycle tyres exhibited at EICMA 2024 that allegedly reproduce claims 1 and 3 of EP 2 519 412 B1 (motorcycle tyre patent). The court granted seizure but notably declined to grant an ex parte injunction, and required Pirelli to initiate merits proceedings within 31 days.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Tianjin Kingtyre 'Radial tire high speed K902' and 'Motorcycle radial tyre-slick racing Grade W' reproduce features of claims 1 and 3 of EP 2 519 412

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 62 UPCA; R. 206 RoP; prima facie infringement

    Note: Milan Local Division granted ex parte seizure accepting prima facie infringement of EP 2 519 412 (motorcycle tyre and pair of motorcycle tyres patent).

  • Urgency and risk of product dispersal at EICMA 2024 justify ex parte provisional measures

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 62 UPCA; R. 206.3(a) RoP

    Note: The presiding judge noted urgency and assigned the matter to a single judge on the date of filing.

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

  • Injunction (inibitoria) should also be granted ex parte

    ClaimantLegal basis: R. 209(4) RoP; proportionality

    Reason: The court declined to grant the injunction inaudita altera parte, having indicated its intention not to do so in a preliminary order (ORD_59450/2024); only seizure and delivery were granted ex parte.

Key legal principles
Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.
Ex parte seizure at trade fair granted but ex parte injunction declined — partial ex parte relief based on proportionalityExecution should occur outside public opening hours where possible (proportionality in trade fair context)Merits proceedings must be commenced within 31 calendar days or 20 working days of service

Browse other cases on this principle.