UPC_CFI_430/2024 – Abbott v Dexcom
- Court
- Nordic-Baltic Regional Division
- Date
- Outcome
- Granted
- Sector
- Pharma/Bio
- Decision Type
- SETTLEMENT
Expert Commentary
Settlement Background and decision The parties request the Court to permit withdrawal, agree with each other’s request and do not ask for costs. The Court grants the request. Comment The court refers to R. 265 RoP and states that parties can appeal within two months after service of the Court’s decision. As I said several times before (and the Court of Appeal confirmed), you do not have to use R. 265 RoP (in my view it is not even applicable) in case of a settlement. Just inform the Court about the fact that the case is settled. It avoids the strange situation which we see in this case, in which the Court states that you can appeal the withdrawal while the case is settled. That does not make any sense!
Full Decision Text
1 Nordic-Baltic - regional division Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 20/01/2025 CLAIMANT Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.- 1360 South Loop Road - 94502 -Alameda - US Represented by Wim Maas DEFENDANTS 1) Dexcom Inc. - 6340 Sequence Drive - 92121-4356 - San Diego - US 2) Dexcom International Limited- Lampousas Street - 1095 - Nicosia- CY Represented by Tjibbe Douma PATENT AT ISSUE Patent no. Proprietor/s EP3977921 Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. COMPOSITION OF PANEL – FULL PANEL Presiding judge Stefan Johansson Judge-rapporteur Kai Härmand Legally qualified judge Pierluigi Perrotti Technically qualified judge Renaud Fulconis LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS: English SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS Infringement action and counterclaim for revocation SUMMARY OF FACTS The Claimant has requested the Court to permit the withdrawal of the infringement action no ACT_588346/2023 and to render a decision declaring the proceedings closed. A cost decision is not requested. The Defendants consent to the withdrawal of the infringement action. Dexcom has requested the Court to permit the withdrawal of the counterclaim for revocation; and to render a decision declaring the proceedings closed the withdrawal of the revocation action no CC_14848/2024. A cost decision is not requested. The Claimant consent to the withdrawal of the counterclaim for revocation. 2 GROUNDS FOR THE DECISION According to Rule 265 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP), a Claimant may apply to withdraw its acƟon as long as there is no final decision. The Court shall decide on such an applicaƟon to withdraw the acƟon aŌer hearing the other party. The applicaƟon to withdraw shall not be permiƩed if the other party has a legiƟmate interest in the acƟon being decided by the Court. The Court declares the proceedings closed. The Claimant has withdrawn the infringement acƟon, and the Defendants have withdrawn the counterclaim for revocaƟon. Both parƟes have been no- Ɵfied of the requests, they have confirmed the withdrawal of the acƟon. The parƟes have agreed that the Court does not issue a decision as to their costs in these proceedings, the Court will refrain from issuing such decision. DECISION The Court declares these proceedings closed. The decision on the closure of the proceedings has to be entered on the register. INFORMATION ABOUT APPEAL This decision may be the subject of an appeal within two months of service of the Court’s decision. DECISION DETAILS Order no. ORD_68783/2024 in ACTION NUMBER: ACT_588346/2023; CC_14848/2024 UPC number: 430_2023 Action type: Infringement Action; Revocation Action Related proceeding no. Application No.: 68369/2024; 68471/2024; 68693/2024 Application Type: Application for leave to withdraw an action (RoP265) Stefan Johansson Kai Härmand Pierluigi Perrotti Renaud Fulconis
Key Holdings
- The Court grants requests for withdrawal when parties agree and do not seek costs.
- Parties are not required to use R. 265 RoP for settlements; simply informing the Court is sufficient.
- It is illogical for the Court to state that a withdrawal in a settled case can be appealed.
Tags
- Costs
- Rules of Procedure
- Settlement
- Withdrawal