2024-06-26 - LD Hamburg - Alexion v. Samsung - UPC_CFI_123/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_123/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Hamburg (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Final Order
- Parteien:
- Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Samsung Bioepis NL B.V.
Kernaussage: 1.
2024-06-26 - LD Hamburg - Alexion
v.
Samsung - UPC_CFI_123/2024
1. The patent claim is always to be interpreted from the point of view of a person skilled in the art. Additionally, the skilled person is taking the purpose of every patent claim into account, to provide the average person skilled in the art with a technical teaching which, when reworked, leads to the intended success of the invention.
2. The court must be convinced of the validity of a patent in suit with a sufficient degree of certainty. A decision on provisional measures cannot be based solely on the court's view of the validity of the patent in suit, but also on the likelihood that the opposition division of the EPO will revoke the patent.
The Hamburg Local Division dismissed the applications for provisional measures in the expectation of an invalidation of the patent in suit by the EPO.
Also see the parallel case vs Amgen (UPC_CFI_124/2024)
Stichwörter
Preliminary injunction; Art, 62(2) UPCA; Rule 209(2) RoP.
Validity of the patent in suit; degree of certainty; Art. 62 (4) UPCA; Rule 211.2 RoP
Nichtigkeitsgründe
vorläufig ·Art. 138 EPCInsufficiency of Disclosure
Preliminarily partially invalidArt. 83 EPC · Art. 138(1)(b) EPC
“Court held it reasonably likely that the EPO Opposition Division will revoke the patent for insufficiency under Art. 83 EPC: the TBA had granted on the express assumption that the antibody with the signal peptide could bind C5, an assumption the Applicant itself now disavows; on the TBA's literal claim construction, the technical teaching may not be sufficiently disclosed [III.3.b].”