2026-05-12 - LD Düsseldorf - Align Technology v. Angelalign - UPC-CFI-0001747/2025

The Düsseldorf Local Division (Panel 2) dismisses Align Technology's application for provisional measures against four Angelalign Technology entities concerning clear-aligner orthodontic appliances (EP 4 295 806 B1). The panel reaffirms the Court of Appeal's framework for PI proceedings (NanoString, Mammut v Ortovox): the applicant must, on the balance of probabilities, show entitlement and infringement to be more likely than not, and bears the burden of presentation and proof for those facts. On claim construction the panel holds that all features of claims 1 and 14 — including the first and second counter moments and the engagement structures — must be realised in one single appliance, not distributed across a series of aligners over the course of treatment. On that construction, Align's reliance on promotional material describing successive treatment phases (anchorage preparation of posterior teeth followed by retraction of anterior teeth) does not substantiate that any single accused aligner generates both counter moments simultaneously. Speculative witness statements asserting that a continuing counter moment 'must necessarily' be applied are not a substitute for analysis of the accused product itself. Costs to the Applicant; value of the case set at EUR 1.6M.