UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CFI 697/2025

Jul 31, 2025·EP2377536 · Methods of Using Sustained Release Aminopyridine Compositions

Case details
Status
Case ClosedSet aside on appeal, Apr 27, 2026
Action
Provisional measures
Category
Provisional measures
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Paris LD
Technology
  • Chemistry
    Pharmaceuticals
Language
English
First decided
Nov 21, 2025
EPO Opposition
  • Actavis Group PTC ehfAdmissible2013-12-05
  • Synthon B.V.Admissible2013-12-06
  • neuraxpharm Arzneimittel GmbHAdmissible2013-12-06
Appealed
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.
Preliminary injunction grantedMedian days to first decision
All UPC54% (38/70)124
Paris LDLockedLocked
Judge Camille LignièresLockedLocked
Judge Carine GilletLockedLocked
Judge Samuel GranataLockedLocked
Judge Rainer FriedrichLockedLocked

At the UPC: Merz Pharmaceuticals LLC (7 cases)·Viatris Santé (6 cases)

This dispute contains 5 other proceedings

UPC CFI 3259/2026·UPC CFI 1901/2026·UPC CoA 917/2025·UPC CoA 906/2025·UPC APP 36985/2025

1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

UPC CFI 3290/2026

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Paris LD·2025

Decisions
  • 2025-11-21
    Application for provisional measuresPublic

    Summary: The Paris Local Division (full panel) rejected Merz's application for provisional measures against Viatris concerning French SPC 033 (based on EP 2 377 536) and the generic product 'FAMPRIDINE VIATRIS LP 10 mg', holding that Merz failed to seek provisional measures within the reasonable time required by R.211.4 RoP: Merz was, or should have been, aware of the imminent infringement well before it filed on 31 July 2025 (at the latest from 2 January 2025, when it recovered direct exploitation rights to FAMPYRA, itself five months before it sent a warning letter, and six months before it applied to the Court after Viatris confirmed the French launch). The Court did not reach the merits of infringement or SPC validity, and ordered Merz to pay Viatris EUR 56,000 in interim costs.

    Show the legal issues (4)
    • Unreasonable delay in seeking provisional measures (R.211.4 RoP)
    • Starting point for calculating diligence when the alleged infringer is a generic manufacturer (imminent infringement under Art. 62.1 UPCA / R.211.2 RoP vs. actual market launch)
    • Whether a Court of Appeal decision interpreting R.211.4 RoP (Boehringer v Zentiva, 13 Aug 2025) creates a new legal situation that cannot be invoked against a party for legal-certainty reasons
    • Interim award of costs on rejection of a provisional-measures application (R.211.1(d) RoP)
Document titleDatePublic
Case closed2026-06-08Not public
Communication2025-11-28Not public
Cover sheet2025-11-28Not public
Application document Claimant2025-11-28Not public
Receipt2025-11-28Not public
Communication2025-11-21Not public
Order2025-11-21Public
Decision2025-11-21Not public
Final Order2025-11-21Not public
Oral procedure closed2025-11-21Not public