2024-04-25 - CD Paris - Toyota Motor Europe v. Neo Wireless - UPC_CFI_361/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_361/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat
- Art:
- Application Order
- Parteien:
- Toyota v. Neo Wireless GmbH Co. KG
Kernaussage: Neither the fact that a Preliminary Objection has been lodged nor the likelihood of success of the appeal against the rejection of the Preliminary Objection are relevant factors for deciding whether the proceedings should be stayed.
2024-04-25 - CD Paris - Toyota Motor Europe
v.
Neo Wireless - UPC_CFI_361/2023
Neither the fact that a Preliminary Objection has been lodged nor the likelihood of success of the appeal against the rejection of the Preliminary Objection are relevant factors for deciding whether the proceedings should be stayed.
notable
In a short but practically important procedural order, the Paris Central Division (Haedicke, J-R) rejected Neo Wireless's application to stay Toyota's pending revocation action against EP 3 876 490. The Defendant had sought a stay on two grounds: (i) its pending CoA appeal against the judge-rapporteur's rejection of its Preliminary Objection, and (ii) parallel (accelerated) EPO opposition proceedings. The court held: (1) neither the lodging of a Preliminary Objection nor the likelihood of success of the appeal against its rejection is a relevant factor for a stay — otherwise the Defendant would unilaterally control the UPC's tight deadline regime; and (2) Art. 33(10) UPCA and R. 295(a) RoP require a 'rapid decision' from the EPO, meaning a concrete known date in the near future, which was not the case here (the EPO hearing date was not even set). The patent's imminent expiry (27 January 2025) weighed in favour of the claimant, who had a legitimate interest in a final UPC decision before expiry.
Stichwörter
Preliminary objection