UPC CoA 540/2024
Sep 19, 2024·EP3685783 Unitary patent · ENDOLUMINAL LASER ABLATION DEVICE FOR TREATING VEINS
- Case details
- StatusCase ClosedActionAppealCategoryMain appeal
- Parties
- Claimants
- biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KGOperating co.
Representatives- Paul Szynka-CBH Rechtsanwälte
- Hannes Jacobsen-CBH Rechtsanwälte
- Alexander M. Fischer-CBH Rechtsanwälte
- Franz Herrmann-Dendorfer & Herrmann
Respondents- Light Guide Optics Germany GmbHOperating co.
- S.I.A. LIGHTGUIDE InternationalOperating co.
Representatives- Jörg Schmidt-Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner mbB
- Jan Caspar Maiers-Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner mbB
- Jörg Weidener-von Rohr Patentanwälte Partnerschaft mbB
- Miriam Marsch-von Rohr Patentanwälte Partnerschaft mbB
- Division
- Court of Appeal
- Technology
- InstrumentsMedical technology
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Feb 24, 2025
- EPO Opposition
- Light Guide Optics Germany GmbHAdmissible2024-07-19
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Judge Klaus Grabinski | Locked |
| Judge Emmanuel Gougé | Locked |
| Judge Peter Blok | Locked |
| Judge Eric Augarde | Locked |
| Judge Max Tilmann | Locked |
At the UPC: biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KG (7 cases)·Light Guide Optics Germany GmbH (6 cases)
This dispute contains 5 other proceedings
UPC CFI 256/2025·UPC CFI 155/2025·UPC CFI 714/2024·UPC CFI 486/2024·UPC APP 67626/2024
1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: Court of Appeal·2024
- 2025-02-24Appeal RoP220.1Public
Summary: Court of Appeal rejected Biolitec's appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division's refusal to grant a preliminary injunction. The CoA upheld the first-instance order, finding that Biolitec had not demonstrated the necessity of provisional measures: proceedings on the merits could be awaited; the status quo on the market had existed for years before the patent was granted; and Biolitec failed to demonstrate sufficient evidence of urgency regarding stocking or tender-related harm. Biolitec was ordered to bear the costs of the appeal proceedings.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Provisional measures necessity test (Art.62 UPCA, R.206, R.211 RoP)
- Weighing parties' interests and time factor
- Status quo on market predating patent grant
- Evidence of stocking and tender-related harm
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| Order | 2026-03-27 | Not public |
| Communication | 2026-03-18 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-03-16 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-03-16 | Not public |
| Application Appellant | 2026-03-16 | Not public |
| Case Closure Formal Check | 2025-08-29 | Not public |
| Order | 2025-02-24 | Public |
| Hearing reference | 2025-02-11 | Not public |
| Hearing reference | 2025-02-11 | Not public |
| Outcome of the Order | 2025-01-16 | Not public |