Case Reports

Jozef Frans Nelissen v OrthoApnea S.L., Vivisol B BV (UPC_CFI_376/2023) Decision of 17 January 2025[1] (ORD_598478/2023) One of the early evidence preservation orders from the UPC was granted by the...

Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft v ITCiCo Spain S.L. UPC_CFI_412/2023 Order of 9 January 2025[1] (ORD_58414/2024) BMW sought revocation of EP 2796333 belonging to ITCiCo.

FUJIFILM Corporation v Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH UPC_CFI_355/2023 Decision of 28 January 2025[1] (ORD_598539/2023) Fujifilm brought an infringement action...

Fives ECL, SAS v. REEL GmbH UPC_CoA_30/2024 Order of 16 January 2025[1] (APL_4000/2024) Fives applied to the UPC Local Division in Hamburg for a determination of damages following a prior...

SharkNinja Germany GmbH, SharkNinja Europe Limited v. Dyson Technology Limited (UPC_CFI_443/2023 and UPC_CoA_297/2024) Decisions of 5 May 2024 (Order no.

Syngenta Limited v Sumi Agro Limited and Sumi Agro Europe Limited (UPC_CFI_201/2024) Order of 12 December 2024 (ORD_65555/2024[1]) As we reported,[2] Syngenta obtained a provisional injunction...

Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care Europe B.V. v Roche Diabetes Care GmbH UPC_CFI_454/2023 Decision of 18 December 2024 (ORD_598508/2023[1]) The claimants sought revocation of EP...

DexCom, Inc. v Abbott Laboratories and 13 other Abbott entities UPC_CFI_395/2023 Decision of 11 December (ORD_63909/2024[1]) The second decision on the merits from the UPC came from the Paris Local...

Plant-e v Arkyne UPC_CFI_239/2023 Decision of 22 November 2024 (ORD_598516/2023 [infringement] ORD_598513/2023 [counterclaim for revocation]) The first claimant Plant-e Knowledge B.V.

(Infringement action UPC_CFI_15/2023) Decision of 15 November 2024 (ORD_598479/2023[1]) The Munich Local Division (MLD) decided in favour of patentee Edwards Lifesciences Corporation (Edwards) with...

Pirelli Tyre S.P.A. v Tianjin Kingtyre Group Co., Ltd. and Kingtyre Deutschland Gmbh. (UPC_CFI _650/2024 relating to EP2519412B1) Pirelli Tyre S.P.A. v Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber Co., Ltd.

Häfele SE & Co KG v Kunststoff KG Nehl & Co (UPC_CFI_443/2024 relating to EP3767151) Order of 25 November 2024 (ORD_62433/2024 [1]) This Decision from the Court of First Instance of the Unified...

Insulet Corporation v. EOFLOW Co., Ltd. (UPC_CFI_380/2024 relating to EP4201327) Order of 22 November 2024 (ORD_56716/2024 [1]) This Decision from the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent...

NanoString Technologies Europe Limited v. President and Fellows of Harvard College (UPC_CFI_252/2023) Decision of 17 December 2024 (Order no. ORD_56957/2024 relating to EP 2 794 928 B1) Introduction...

AIM Sport v Supponor UPC_CoA_489/2023 and UPC_CoA_500/2023 Decision of 12 November 2024 (ORD_598488/2023 & ORD_598489/2023) AIM Sport had brought both provisional injunction and infringement...

Following yesterday's announcement that Darren Smyth has been appointed as the third guest blogger on the IPKat, he has now made his first post.

The EPO has just officially published (T 777/08 Atorvstatin Polymorphs OJEPO 12/2011 633-643) a decision of the Technical Boards of Appeal which surprisingly finds that, in general, a claim to a...

In a recent EIP newsflash we reported a recent development in the way the UK Intellectual Property Office handles subject matter excluded from patentability, based on a High Court judgement relating...

Can use by a competitor of a trademark as a keyword in an advertising service, such as Google’s AdWords service, be restricted by the proprietor of the trademark? Services such as AdWords allow...

The Patent Box reaches another milestone. On the 6 December the Government will publish the draft legislation based on the public consultation in the light of its original proposals.

In Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company [2011] UKSC 51, The UK Supreme Court overturned the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings and found that a patent met the requirement of...

The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA) has ruled on the admissibility of disclaimers which disclaim subject-matter which is disclosed as an embodiment in the application as filed.

In its judgement of 18 October 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has confirmed that human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) do not constitute patentable subject matter, given the ban...

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Lucasfilm v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39, has both confirmed earlier judgments as to when a three-dimensional item may not be protected by copyright as a work of...

In May 2011, a review, entitled “Digital Opportunity: A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth” (commonly known as “The Hargreaves Review”), was commissioned by the Government to assess whether...

A recent High Court judgement regarding Halliburton’s Patent Applications ([2011] EWHC 2508 (Pat)) signals a new development in the way the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) handles subject...

In a recent High Court judgement involving Samuel Smith and Cropton breweries the Hon Mr Justice Arnold stressed on the importance of mediation for resolving disputes quickly and cost efficiently.

A Court of Appeal judgment in Schutz v Werit has clarified the effect on claims for costs of failing to register an exclusive licence.This judgment is a continuation of an earlier judgment, reported...

This case raised the question of the proper interpretation of a medical use (“Swiss”) claim, and confirmed that they will generally be interpreted in the same way as a “specific use” second medical...

A recent judgement from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in case C-263/09P highlights the interplay between Community Trade Marks (CTM) and national rights.