UPC_CFI_255/2023 – FUJIFILM v Kodak
- Court
- Local Division Düsseldorf
- Date
- Outcome
- Denied
- Sector
- Other
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Further written submissions Background On 28 November, after the written procedure had come to an end, the defendant filed a further written submission. The defendant had not filed a reasoned request (R. 36 RoP) to ask permission of the Court. Order The Court will disregard the defendant’s submission contained in the brief of 28 November. Comment A representative should by now know the Rules of Procedure for filing a further written submission. You should file a reasoned request. The normal rule is no further written submissions. Therefore, a reasoned request should mention special reasons to obtain an exception to the rule. The limited number of written submissions may be different than the national (e.g. German) practice, but a representative in the UPC has to realize that the UPC is a supra national court with its own rules.
Full Decision Text
1 Düsseldorf Local Division UPC_CFI_355/2023 Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court issued on 29 November 2024 concerning EP 3 594 009 B1 CLAIMANT: FUJIFILM Corporation, 26-30, Nishiazabu 2-chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106-8620, Japan, represented by: Lars Baum, HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER, Steinstraße 20, 40212 Düsseldorf, Germany electronic address for service: lars.baum@hoyngrokh.com DEFENDANTS: 1. Kodak GmbH, Kesselstraße 19, 70327 Stuttgart, represented by its CEOs Sven Freyer and Manfred Stegmaier, at the same place, represented by: Eva Acker, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Rechtsanwälte Steuerberater PartG mbB, Feldmühleplatz 1, 40545 Düssel- dorf, Germany electronic address for service: eva.acker@freshfields.com 2. Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kesselstraße 19, 70327 Stuttgart, represented by its CEOs Sven Freyer and Manfred Stegmaier, at the same place, represented by: Eva Acker, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Rechtsanwälte Steuerberater PartG mbB, Feldmühleplatz 1, 40545 Düssel- dorf, Germany electronic address for service: eva.acker@freshfields.com 3. Kodak Holding GmbH, Kesselstraße 19, 70327 Stuttgart, represented by its CEOs Sven Freyer and Manfred Stegmaier, at the same place, represented by: Eva Acker, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Rechtsanwälte Steuerberater PartG mbB, Feldmühleplatz 1, 40545 Düssel- dorf, Germany electronic address for service: eva.acker@freshfields.com 2 PATENT AT ISSUE: European patent n° EP 3 594 009 B1 PANEL/DIVISION: Panel of the Local Division in Düsseldorf DECIDING JUDGES: This order was issued by Presiding Judge Thomas acting as judge-rapporteur. LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: English SUBJECT OF THE PROCEEDINGS: R. 9.2, 36 RoP – Rejection of further submissions GROUNDS OF THE ORDER: Pursuant to R. 36 RoP, the judge-rapporteur may, on a reasoned request by a party, allow further written submissions to be exchanged within a period to be specified. The Defendants did not make a reasoned request and the judge-rapporteur did not allow further written submissions to be exchanged. In the light of the foregoing, the Court will disregard the written submissions contained in the brief of 28 November 2024. ORDER: The Court will disregard the Defendant’s submissions in the brief of 28 November 2024. DETAILS OF THE ORDER: App_63445/2024 related to the main proceeding ACT_578607/2023 UPC-Number: UPC_CFI_355/2023 Subject of the Proceedings: Patent infringement action Issued in Düsseldorf on 29 November 2024 NAMES AND SIGNATURES Presiding Judge Thomas
Key Holdings
- A further written submission filed by the defendant after the close of the written procedure was disregarded by the Court.
- The submission was rejected because the defendant failed to file a reasoned request for permission as required by R. 36 RoP.
- The decision emphasizes strict adherence to UPC procedural rules regarding further written submissions, which differ from some national practices.
Tags
- Case Management
- Pleadings
- Procedural Issues
- Written Procedure