UPC CoA 402/2024

At the UPC: AstraZeneca Group (13 cases)·Samsung Group (57 cases)

• 2025-06-19
  Public

  Summary: Court of Appeal Panel 2 rejected Alexion Pharmaceuticals' application for rehearing (R. 245 RoP) of the earlier Court of Appeal order dismissing Alexion's appeal against the Hamburg Local Division's denial of provisional measures. Alexion had alleged fundamental procedural defects (new claim interpretation standard applied without being heard, and incorrect facts). The Court held that no fundamental procedural defect within the meaning of Art. 81(1)(b) UPCA / R. 247(c) RoP was established. Alexion ordered to bear Samsung's costs of the rehearing proceedings.

  Show the legal issues (4)

  • Rehearing application (Art. 81(1)(b) UPCA, R. 245 RoP)
  • Fundamental procedural defect
  • Right to be heard (Art. 76 UPCA)
  • Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria treatment / complement inhibitor
• 2024-12-20
  Appeal RoP220.1Public

  Summary: The Court of Appeal dismissed Alexion's appeal against the Hamburg Local Division's refusal to grant provisional measures against Samsung Bioepis regarding patent EP 3167888. The Court addressed the interpretation of patent claims containing linguistic errors and the relevance of prosecution history.

  Show the legal issues (5)

  • Provisional measures
  • Patent claim interpretation
  • Linguistic error in patent claim
  • Prosecution history
  • Biosimilar pharmaceutical
• 2024-07-30
  Public

  Summary: Procedural order from the Court of Appeal dated 30 July 2024 rejecting Alexion Pharmaceuticals' request for expedition of its appeal against the Hamburg Local Division's dismissal of its preliminary injunction application against Samsung Bioepis NL B.V. The CoA found the circumstances were not sufficiently urgent to outweigh Samsung's interest in the standard 15-day response period, noting that the appeal concerned a purely legal issue was insufficient justification, and that Alexion had not used the full time period available to it.

  Show the legal issues (3)

  • Expedition of appeal under R. 9.3(b) RoP
  • Balancing interests of parties in procedural timelines
  • Equality of arms