2024-02-02 - LD Munich - Amgen v. Sanofi et al. - UPC_CFI_14/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_14/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Procedural Order
- Parteien:
- Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Groupe S.A., Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Kernaussage: Unanimous requests by all parties directed to a Local or Regional Division to refer a counterclaim for revocation to the Central Division for decision will be granted unless strong counterarguments require a different decision.
2024-02-02 - LD Munich - Amgen
v.
Sanofi et al. - UPC_CFI_14/2023
Unanimous requests by all parties directed to a Local or Regional Division to refer a counterclaim for revocation to the Central Division for decision will be granted unless strong counterarguments require a different decision.
notable
The Munich Local Division, acting on an early Rule 37.2 RoP decision, referred the sole counterclaim for revocation (brought by defendant Regeneron) to the Central Division under Art. 33(3)(b) UPCA because all parties requested the referral. The panel announced the doctrine that unanimous party requests for referral will be granted unless strong counterarguments require a different decision, and found none. The court decided to proceed with the infringement action rather than stay it, observing that the Central Division's oral hearing on the standalone revocation action (filed by defendants 1-3) was scheduled for 4 June 2024 and a first-instance validity decision is expected before summer — which the Munich LD may then take into account when applying Art. 33.3(c) UPCA and Rule 37.4 RoP. The panel also expressly flagged that defendants 1-3 could have triggered consolidation by filing counterclaims under Rule 75 RoP with their SoD, which would have forced the Central Division to stay the standalone revocation action under Rule 75(3) RoP.
Stichwörter
Article 33(3) UPCA; Rule 37 RoP; agreement of parties; discretion to refer counterclaim for revocation to central division; discretion to proceed with infringement proceedings; discretion to stay infringement proceedings.