UPC_CoA_930/2025

FLUID DELIVERY DEVICE WITH TRANSCUTANEOUS ACCESS TOOL, INSERTION MECHANISM AND BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING FOR USE THEREWITH

AppealsMain AppealCourt of AppealAppealCase Closed

This case cites

Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
UPC_CoA_523/2024	jurisdiction	Binding	see decision of 19 December 2025, UPC_CoA_523/2024, Docket Navigator, paragraphs 18-19 with references
UPC_CoA_9/2026	jurisdiction	Binding	it is, as far as relevant here, a source of law on which the Court shall base its decisions by virtue of Art. 24(1)(d) UPCA (decision of 24 February 2026, UPC_CoA_9/2026, Gowling, paragraph 19)
UPC_CoA_70/2025	jurisdiction	Binding	cf. Art. 58 UPCA: "for the protection of trade secrets, personal data or other confidential information", CoA, 1 August 2025, UPC_CoA_70/202, Strabag v Swarco Futurit et al., para. 17
UPC_CoA_768/2024	infringement by equivalents	Binding	In its order in preliminary injunction proceedings of 30 April 2025 initiated by Insulet (UPC_CoA_768/2024, APL_64374/2024, ORD_69078/2024)
UPC_CoA_699/2025	confidentiality of information communicated pursuant to court order	Binding	see CoA 14 October 2025, UPC_CoA_699/2025, Kodak v Fujifilm, para. 45
UPC_CoA_70/2025	R.262.2 RoP grant does not automatically restrict other party's use of information	Binding	Granting a request under R. 262.2 RoP does not automatically lead to protection against the other party disclosing the information (CoA, 1 August 2025, UPC_CoA_70/2025, Strabag v Swarco Futurit et al. para. 19).

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
262.2	jurisdiction	Binding	concerning an appeal against an order denying a request under R. 262.2 RoP
262A	jurisdiction	Binding	Trade secrets or other confidential information lose their character as trade secrets or other confidential information if they are disclosed to the other party without an order pursuant to R. 262A RoP
262.2	confidentiality request for written pleadings	Binding	R. 262A RoP applies at least mutatis mutandis.
191	communication of confidential information	Binding	information which has to be communicated according to a Court order or decision (see CoA 14 October 2025, UPC_CoA_699/2025, Kodak v Fujifilm, para. 45). R. 262A RoP applies at least mutatis mutandis.
262A	application to restrict use of confidential information	Binding	Pursuant to R. 262A RoP, a party may make an Application to the Court for an order that certain information contained in its pleadings or the collection and use of evidence in proceedings may be restricted

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
T-718/15	jurisdiction	Persuasive	Where there are EU rules in a sphere concerned by the TRIPS Agreement, EU law will apply (General Court, judgment of 5 February 2018, PTC Therapeutics International v EMA, T-718/15, EU:T:2018:66, para 62)
C-927/19	jurisdiction	Binding	CJEU, judgment of 7 September 2021, Klaipėdos regiono atliekų tvarkymo centras, C-927/19, EU:C:2021:700, at para 97
C-300/98	jurisdiction	Binding	the TRIPS Agreement does not have direct effect under EU law (judgment of 14 December 2000, Dior and Others, joined cases C-300/98 and C-392/98, EU:C:2000:688, para. 44)
C-341/24	jurisdiction	Binding	All the UPC Contracting Member States are, as EU Member States, parties to the TRIPS Agreement (judgment of 11 September 2025, Duca di Salaparuta, C-341/24, EU:C:2025:693, para 6)

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
Article 58 UPCA	jurisdiction	Binding	Art. 58 UPCA: "for the protection of trade secrets, personal data or other confidential information"
Article 24(1)(d) UPCA	jurisdiction	Binding	it is a source of law on which the Court shall base its decisions by virtue of Art. 24(1)(d) UPCA
67	communication of confidential information pursuant to court order	Binding	information received as a result of the other party's compliance with an order to communicate information pursuant to Art. 67 UPCA and R. 191 RoP
58	court power to restrict collection and use of evidence	Binding	Pursuant to Art. 58 UPCA, the Court may, to protect the trade secrets, personal data, or other confidential information of a party to the proceedings...

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
Art. 39(2) TRIPS	jurisdiction	Binding	subject to reasonable steps under the circumstances, by the person lawfully in control of the information, to keep it secret (see Art. 39 (2) TRIPS Agreement)
Directive 2016/943	jurisdiction	Binding	directive 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition
Art. 39(2) TRIPS	definition of trade secret	Background	The classification of information as a trade secret requires that (a) the information is not... generally known... (see Art. 39 (2) TRIPS Agreement).

Target	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
UPC_CFI_1167/2025	jurisdiction	Background	Milan Central Division, 4 December 2025, UPC_CFI_1167/2025

Cited by

Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.

Cited in	Date	Legal point	Strength	Excerpt
UPC_CoA_34/2026 Court of Appeal	Feb 26, 2026	jurisdiction	Binding	On 4 February 2026 the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against the penalty order and the cost order (UPC_CoA_930/2025).