2026-04-10 - CD Milan - Fisher & Paykel Healthcare v. Flexicare (Group) - UPC_CFI_480/2025
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_480/2025
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Central Division- Section
- Art:
- Decision
- Parteien:
- Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited v. Flexicare (Group) Limited
Kernaussage: Patent revoked in its entirety for lack of novelty.
2026-04-10 - CD Milan - Fisher & Paykel Healthcare
v.
Flexicare (Group) - UPC_CFI_480/2025
notable
Patent revoked in its entirety for lack of novelty. The Milan CD established a key novelty assessment principle: when comparing prior art to the patent scope, if any valid way of 'mapping' prior art elements to claim features results in novelty being destroyed, the patent must be revoked. Claim 1 and AR1 not novel over D2 (WO 2015/193833). AR3 et seq. rejected for lack of clarity (Art. 84 EPC). The court also clarified that there is no implicit request to maintain a patent based on dependent claims — the patentee must file a formal amendment application to restructure claims.
Nichtigkeitsgründe
Art. 138 EPCNovelty
Patent invalid (this ground)Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“Claim 1 lacks novelty over D2. Court applied mapping principle — any valid mapping destroys novelty. AR1 also not novel. [77-146]”
Clarity
Patent invalid (this ground)Art. 84 EPC · derivative
“AR3+ lack clarity under Art. 84 EPC regarding gas tube / nasal cannula relationship. [147-161]”