2026-05-26 - LD Milan - Pirelli Tyre v. TIANJIN KINGTYRE GROUP et al. - UPC_CFI_771/2024

ITALIAN: Nel caso di contestazione della violazione di una rivendicazione di metodo in una decisione by default, la presunzione di cui all’art. 55 UPCA, una volta che la corte abbia accertato la piena corrispondenza letterale dei prodotti contestati con gli insegnamenti brevettuali, comporta l’accoglimento della domanda.

In a default decision under Rule 355 RoP against a Chinese tyre manufacturer that did not enter an appearance after valid Hague-Convention service, the Milan Local Division found infringement of Pirelli's EP 2 519 412 (a motorcycle tyre and a method for increasing the tyre's footprint). The court set out the requirements for a default decision (Art. 37 UPCS, R. 355 and R. 277 RoP): valid service, a missed time limit, and pleaded facts that justify the measures sought — with R. 355.2 RoP and Art. 54 UPCA excluding any automatic grant, so the facts must still be proven (R. 171.2 RoP non-contestation does not apply in default). It confirmed that validity is not examined in a default decision, as the court cannot raise invalidity ex officio and European patents are presumed valid from grant (CJEU Phoenix Contact, C-44/21). On the merits, the K902 and GRADE W tyres literally reproduced all features of product claim 3 and dependent claims 6, 7, 14, 15 and 20; and as to method claim 1, the headnote principle applied: once full literal correspondence of the contested products with the patent teaching is established, the Art. 55(2) UPCA process presumption — triggered here by the defendant's default — leads to allowing the method-claim infringement claim. The court granted an injunction (Arts. 25, 63 UPCA) across the states where the patent is in force, ordered publication (Art. 80 UPCA) and penalties (Art. 83.4 UPCA), and declared damages liability (Art. 68 UPCA) with quantum deferred to a separate procedure. It refused recall/destruction (Art. 64 UPCA), the information order (Art. 67 UPCA / R. 191 RoP) and an interim damages award (R. 119 RoP) as disproportionate, because there was no proof of actual sales to the market.