2024-01-24 - CD Munich - Sanofi v. Amgen - UPC_CFI_1/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_1/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Central Division - Section
- Art:
- Procedural Order
- Parteien:
- Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Amgen, Inc.
Kernaussage: In a Rule 9.
2024-01-24 - CD Munich - Sanofi
v.
Amgen - UPC_CFI_1/2023
notable
In a Rule 9.1 RoP application, the Munich CD (JR Kupecz) admitted Sanofi's letter of 15 January 2024 and three accompanying expert declarations (totalling six pages) addressing discrete new points raised for the first time in the expert declarations attached to Amgen's Rejoinder. The Court rejected Amgen's submission that the application was premature — holding that Rule 9.1 RoP expressly empowers the Court to order steps/evidence 'at any stage of the proceedings', including during the written procedure after Rule 43 pleadings. However, the JR emphasised that there is no automatic right to reply to a Rejoinder: the front-loaded character of UPC proceedings (Preamble 7 RoP) and the fixed Rule 43 framework set the default, and departures require discretionary justification. Here, the specific circumstances — concise length, focused response to new points, bona fide procedural use — justified departure. The JR also rejected Amgen's alternative request to be allowed a reply brief and counter-expert opinions, holding that the right to be heard does not entail 'yet another exchange' where the new points were Amgen's own, and Amgen's right to be heard would be exercised at the oral hearing. The panel further decided no interim conference was needed and cancelled the provisional 7 February 2024 date; written procedure to close on 6 February 2024.