UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CoA 2/2024

Jan 2, 2024·EP3763331 · PROSTHETIC VALVE CRIMPING DEVICE

Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Appeal
Category
Main appeal
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Court of Appeal
Technology
  • Instruments
    Medical technology
  • Mechanical engineering
    Machine tools
Language
German
First decided
Feb 15, 2024
EPO Opposition
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
Median days to first decision
All UPC124
Judge Klaus GrabinskiLocked
Judge Peter BlokLocked
Judge Emanuela GermanoLocked
Judge Bernard LedeboerLocked
Judge Stefan WilhelmLocked

At the UPC: Meril Group (60 cases)·Edwards Lifesciences Group (57 cases)

This dispute contains 2 other proceedings

UPC APP 3187/2024·UPC CFI 249/2023

1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

UPC CoA 4/2024

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Court of Appeal·2024

Decisions
  • 2024-10-04
    Appeal RoP220.2Public

    Summary: Order from the Court of Appeal dated 4 October 2024 on costs following Meril's submission of an undertaking (Unterlassungs- und Verpflichtungserklärung) to Edwards Lifesciences, which resulted in dismissal of the preliminary injunction action. The CoA held that, where a defendant undertakes to comply with the claimant's requests after proceedings have commenced, the claimant is generally to be regarded as the prevailing party under Art. 69(1) UPCA, without any need to examine the merits at the time of the undertaking. The undertaking itself implies that the claimant's requests were satisfied. Accordingly, Meril was ordered to bear the costs of proceedings.

    Show the legal issues (2)
    • Prevailing party determination after undertaking under Art. 69(1) UPCA
    • Costs allocation after dismissal following defendant's undertaking
  • 2024-02-15

    Summary: Procedural order of the Court of Appeal addressing the appeal fee in an appeal by Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences against a Munich Local Division order in provisional measures proceedings brought by Edwards Lifesciences Corporation regarding EP 3 763 331 (crimping device for heart valve prostheses). After Meril submitted a cease-and-desist undertaking, Edwards accepted it and the case was resolved without a ruling. The first-instance court ordered Meril to bear costs up to EUR 200,000 and set the action value at EUR 1,500,000. Meril appealed. The Court of Appeal order concerned procedural aspects of the appeal fee payment.

    Show the legal issues (3)
    • Appeal fee in provisional measures proceedings
    • Costs after cease-and-desist undertaking rendering action devoid of purpose
    • Devolution of costs on acceptance of cease-and-desist undertaking
Document titleDatePublic
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-10-14Not public
Application - Change of Address2024-10-14Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-10-04Not public
Headnote-and-Keywords2024-10-04Not public
Decision-On-Appeal-On-Measures-Outcome2024-10-04Not public
Final order2024-10-04Public
Hearing reference2024-07-22Not public
Hearing reference2024-07-22Not public
Receipt2024-07-11Not public
Anlage HLB 52024-07-10Not public