Moteur de recherche
dans les décisions
de la Juridiction unifiée du brevet

Bienvenue dans ce moteur de recherche dans les décisions de la Juridiction unifiée du brevet (JUB)

À propos et fonctionnement

Cette base de données privée, maintenue par Pierre Véron, met gracieusement à votre disposition les décisions rendues publiques par la Juridiction unifiée du brevet depuis son entrée en activité le 1er juin 2023 et un moteur de recherche pour les explorer.

Elle contient aussi des traductions automatiques en anglais (de courtoisie et sans garantie)  des décisions qui n’ont pas été rendues en anglais (ainsi que quelques traductions automatiques en français).

Pour voir TOUTES les décisions disponibles, tapez une astérisque * dans la case Recherche globale.

Recherche par mots (“preuve”,“evidence” ou “beweis”) ou par expressions (“procédure accélérée”, “accelerated proceedings” ou “beschleunigtes verfahren”).

Utilisation possible des opérateurs booléens (en anglais et en majuscules) :

  • test AND anticorps” , “test AND antibodies” ou “test AND antikörper
  • avocat OR représentant”,  “lawyer OR representative” ou “anwalt OR vertreter
  • test AND NOT anticorps”, “test AND NOT antibodies” ou “test AND NOT antikörper

Joker pour un caractère: ? Joker pour plusieurs caractères: *

Pour plus d’informations sur la syntaxe de recherche cliquez ici


520 résultats trouvés




Date
Parties
Numéro de l'affaire
Numéro de registre
Numéro de la décision ou de l'ordonnance
Type d'action
Juridiction - Division
Langue de procédure
Sommaire
Mots clés
Documents
Date Parties Numéro de l'affaire Numéro de registre Numéro de la décision ou de l'ordonnance Type d'action Juridiction - Division Langue de procédure Details Sommaire Mots clés Documents
03/12/2024 10x Genomics, Inc. v. Curio Bioscience Inc. UPC_CFI_140/2024 App_48598/2024 ORD_48718/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English 1. Not only the claimant but also the defendant may be ordered to provide security for legal costs within the meaning of R. 158 RoP. 2. If the claimant requests such a security for legal costs to be provided by the defendant, the Court has to take into account that the claimant made a voluntary decision to litigate. This circumstance does have implications for the weighing of interests when exercising the discretion under Rule 158 RoP. In doing so, special care must be taken by the Court that the Defendant’s right to a fair trial is protected and particularly that the Defendant is not denied the opportunity to present its case effectively before the Court. Security of costs, Art. 64 UPCA, R. 158 RoP, Order against the defendant
03/12/2024 SharkNinja Germany GmbH, SharkNinja Europe Limited v. Dyson Technology Limited UPC_CoA_297/2024 APL_32012/2024 ORD_62483/2024 Appeal RoP220.1 Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) German    
29/11/2024 Aarke AB v. SodaStream Industries Ltd. UPC_CoA_548/2024 APL_52969/2024 ORD_56773/2024 Appeal RoP220.2 Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English    
29/11/2024 Fujifilm v. Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak GmbH UPC_CFI_355/2023 App_61390/2024 ORD_62349/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   Simultaneous interpretation, R. 109 RoP, dismissed, request
29/11/2024 Fujifilm v. Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak GmbH UPC_CFI_355/2023 App_63445/2024 ORD_63627/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   R. 9.2 RoP, R. 36 RoP, Disregarding of facts
28/11/2024 *** v. Amycel LLC UPC_CoA_490/2024 APL_47391/2024 ORD_63265/2024 Appeal RoP220.2 Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English    
27/11/2024 NJOY Netherlands B.V. v. VMR Products LLC UPC_CFI_308/2023 ACT_571565/2023 ORD_598498/2023 Revocation Action Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat English 1. The Unified Patent Court legal provisions introduce the so-called ‘front loaded’ procedural system whereby a claimant is required to concretely elaborate his arguments and evidence in its first written pleading. However, these provisions must be interpreted in the light of the principle of proportionality, which requires that the parties should not be burdened with tasks that are unnecessary to achieve the stated objective, and in the light of the principle of procedural efficiency, which is contrary to excessive and overly detailed allegations of facts and production of multiple documents in relation to matters that can be presumed to be known to the opposing party and not to be disputed by them. 2. In revocation actions, the claimant is required to specify in detail the grounds of invalidity that allegedly affect the contested patent, as well as the prior art documents relied upon to support any allegation of lack of novelty or inventive step. Consequently, the claimant cannot introduce new grounds of invalidity of the attacked patent or introduce new documents considered novelty destroying or convincing starting points for the assessment of lack of inventive step in subsequent written acts. 3. In certain situation, following the defence raised by the defendant, the claimant may allege new facts and new evidence, insofar as they are considered capable of supporting the main facts already timely alleged and disputed by the defendant or the probative value of the evidence already filed. 4. While it is in general questionable that a particular published patent application or a patent specification can be considered as an indication of common general knowledge, however the statement of the author of the patent that a teaching is widely spread at the time can used as evidence of the fact that this teaching forms part of common general knowledge. validity of the patent., written procedure
27/11/2024 TOTAL SEMICONDUCTOR, LLC v. Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH, Texas Instruments EMEA Sales GmbH UPC_CoA_651/2024 APL_59329/2024 ORD_61376/2024 Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English    
27/11/2024 Oerlikon Textile GmbH & CO KG v. Himson Engineering Private Limited UPC_CFI_240/2023 ACT_549550/2023 ORD_63173/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division Italian    
26/11/2024 Myriad Service GmbH, Myriad Genetics, Inc., Myriad International GmbH, Myriad Genetics B.V., Eurobio Scientific, Myriad Genetics S.r.l., Myriad GmbH, Myriad Genetics S.A.S. UPC_CFI_437/2024 App_59539/2024 ORD_59602/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division English    
26/11/2024 C-KORE SYSTEMS LIMITED v. Novawell UPC_CFI_468/2023 ACT_592899/2023 ORD_598523/2023 Infringement Action Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division English    
25/11/2024 Oerlikon Textile GmbH & CO KG v. Himson Engineering Private Limited UPC_CFI_240/2023 ACT_549550/2023 ORD_62633/2024 Generic Order Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division Italian    
25/11/2024 DexCom, Inc. v. Abbott UPC_CFI_395/2023 App_60804/2024 ORD_62696/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division English    
25/11/2024 FUJIFILM Corporation v. 1. Kodak GmbH , 2. Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, 3. Kodak Holding GmbH UPC_CFI_355/2023 App_61143/2024 ORD_62659/2024 Application Rop 333 Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   Request dismissed, R. 36 RoP, R. 333 RoP
22/11/2024 Plant-e B.V., Plant-e Knowledge B.V. v. Arkyne Technologies S.L. UPC_CFI_239/2023 ACT_549536/2023 ORD_598516/2023 Infringement Action Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division English    
22/11/2024 Insulet Corporation v. A. Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l. UPC_CFI_400/2024 ACT_40442/2024 ORD_56587/2024 Application for provisional measures Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Local Division English    
22/11/2024 Panasonic Holdings Corporation v. Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd., OROPE Germany GmbH UPC_CFI_ 210/2023 ACT_545551/2023 ORD_598506/2023 Infringement Action Court of First Instance - Mannheim (DE) Local Division German    
21/11/2024 OrthoApnea S.L., Vivisol B BV v. *** UPC_CoA_456/2024 APL_44633/2024 ORD_58904/2024 Appeal RoP220.2 Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) Dutch    
21/11/2024 MERIL LIFE SCIENCES PVT LIMITED, INTERLUX, UAB, SORMEDICA, UAB, SMIS INTERNATIONAL OÜ, MERIL GMBH, VAB-LOGISTIK, UAB v. EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES CORPORATION UPC_CoA_511/2024 APL_50205/2024 ORD_61000/2024 Appeal RoP220.2 Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) English    
21/11/2024 Collomix GmbH v. Lidl, Delta-Sport UPC_CFI_550/2024 App_58075/2024 ORD_58893/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division German    
21/11/2024 DexCom, Inc. v. Abbott Logistics B.V., Abbott Laboratories GmbH, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Oy, Abbott Scandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott (S.A./N.V.), Abbott B.V., Abbott France (S.A.S.), Abbott GmbH, Abbott Diagnostics GmbH, Abbott Gesellschaft m.b.H., Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Abbott s.r.l. UPC_CFI_499/2023 - ORD_59318/2024 Generic Order Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English    
20/11/2024 Magna International France, SARL, Magna PT s.r.o., Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG UPC_CFI_368/2024 App_59992/2024 ORD_60264/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   dismissed, R. 353 RoP, request for rectification
20/11/2024 DexCom, Inc. v. Abbott UPC_CFI_499/2023 App_60996/2024 ORD_61355/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   R. 9.3 RoP, Extension of time limits, fairness and equity
20/11/2024 Magna International France, SARL, Magna PT s.r.o., Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG UPC_CFI_347/2024 App_59991/2024 ORD_60265/2024 Generic application Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division English   dismissed, R. 353 RoP, request for rectification
15/11/2024 Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd., Meril Gmbh UPC_CFI_15/2023 ACT_459987/2023 ORD_598479/2023 Infringement Action Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division English    
1 2 ... 21