UPC_CFI_502/2023 – Edwards v Meril
- Court
- Local Division Munich
- Date
- Sector
- Pharma/Bio
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Infringement / Counterclaim Revocation Order of the Judge-Rapporteur: The parties are summoned to an oral hearing on 11 February 2025.
Full Decision Text
Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Local Division Munich issued on 5 February 2025 CLAIMANT Edwards Lifesciences Corporation 1 Edwards Way - 92614 - Irvine – US represented by: Boris Kreye, Elsa Tzschoppe, Ioana Hategan (Bird & Bird) supported by: Bryce Matthewson (Powell Gilbert) Bernhard Thum, Jonas Weickert (Thum & Partner) DEFENDANTS 1) Meril Gmbh Bornheimer Straße 135-137 - 53119 - Bonn – DE 2) Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. M1‐M2, Meril Park, Survey No 135/2/B & 174/2 Muktanand Marg, Chala, Vapi - 396 191 Gujarat - Vapi - IN 3) Meril Italy S.r.l. Piazza Tre Torri 2 - 20145 - Mailand - IT represented by: Andreas von Falck, Lukas Wollenschlaeger, Felipe Zilly (Hogan Lovells) PATENT AT ISSUE European patent n° 3669828 PANEL/DIVISION Panel 1 of the Local Division Munich Local Division Munich UPC_CFI_501/2023 UPC_CFI_501/2023 2 DECIDING JUDGE/S This decision has been delivered by the presiding judge Dr. Matthias Zigann acting as judge- rapporteur. LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS English SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS Infringement Action with counterclaim for revocation scheduling ORDER The parties are summoned to the oral hearing on 11 February 2025, 9.00 a.m., Denisstr. 3 in Munich, room 212 and overflow room 220b. INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEW BY PANEL Any party may request that this Order be referred to the panel for a review pursuant to R. 333 RoP. Pending review, the Order shall be effective (R. 102.2 RoP) INFORMATION ABOUT ORAL HEARING HELD IN COURT The oral hearing shall be open to the public unless the Court decides to make it, to the extent necessary, confidential in the interests of one or both parties or third parties or in the general interest of justice or public order (R. 115 RoP). INFORMATION ABOUT AUDIO RECORDING The oral hearing shall be audio recorded. The recording shall be made available at the premises of the Court to the parties or their representatives after the oral hearing (R. 115 RoP). INFORMATION ABOUT ABSENCE OR DELAY OF A REPRESENTATIVE A decision by default may be given, upon request, against a party that was duly summoned but fails to appear at the oral hearing (R. 355.1 (b) RoP. INFORMATION ABOUT DECISION BY DEFAULT Should a party fail to comply with the present Order within the time period specified, a decision by default may be given in accordance with R. 355 RoP (R. 103.1, last subparagraph and .2 RoP). UPC_CFI_501/2023 3 DETAILS OF THE ORDER Order no. ORD_598573/2023 in ACTION NUMBER: ACT_597277/2023 UPC number: UPC_CFI_501/2023 Action type: Infringement Action Dr. Zigann Presiding Judge
Key Holdings
- The Judge-Rapporteur issued an order summoning the parties to an oral hearing.
- This procedural step is part of an ongoing case involving claims of infringement and a counterclaim for revocation.
Tags
- Case Management
- Infringement
- Oral Hearing
- Revocation