2025-07-30 - LD Düsseldorf - Headwater Research v. Samsung - UPC_CFI_26/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_26/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Proceeding Decision
- Parteien:
- Headwater Research v. Samsung
Kernaussage: The Court can reject a new line of arguments pursuant to R.
2025-07-30 - LD Düsseldorf - Headwater Research
v.
Samsung - UPC_CFI_26/2024
The Court can reject a new line of arguments pursuant to R. 9.2 RoP in a case where the issue has been raised from the outset and the new argument is based on completely different passages of a lengthy document. Neither the Court nor the other party may be forced to deal with it from scratch. This undermines the concept of the front-loaded procedure established by the Rules of Procedure.
The Düsseldorf Local Division granted a counterclaim for revocation due to added subject-matter and rejected the application to amend the patent as none of the auxiliary requests cured the objection of added matter. Consequently, the Court dismissed the infringement action.
The Court had disregarded arguments which were only brought forwarding in the oral hearing, stating that this was against the UPC's principle of front-loaded proceedings and that the Defendants and the Court could not be forced to deal with it from scratch.
Stichwörter
R. 9.2 RoP, added-matter
Nichtigkeitsgründe
Art. 138 EPCAdded Matter
Patent invalid (this ground)Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
“Application vs network service usage activity is material distinction. 26 auxiliary requests failed.”