2026-03-27 - LD Mannheim - Ipg Laser v. TRUMPF Laser UK - UPC_CFI_224/2025

The Mannheim Local Division upheld a fibre-laser combiner patent against a revocation counterclaim and granted the full range of infringement remedies across seven contracting member states. On construction the Court held that where the claim wording is unambiguous, embodiments the specification discloses fall outside the scope of protection: the claim required an annular high-index region, so the figures showing a central core alone are not covered, expressly in derogation from the Court of Appeal's rule in Meril v Edwards that an embodiment presented by the specification may as a general rule be taken to be claimed. On validity it left open whether priority was validly claimed, holding the patent good even on the assumption that it was not: there was no added matter, the claim was novel over the cited European application, and it involved an inventive step starting from that document. Novelty turned on a single feature — the Court found the prior art disclosed the output-fibre structure and most of the overlay requirement, but not a bundle with only one inner fibre, and a novelty assessment may not combine or modify figures the document does not itself show together. Starting from that document there was no motivation to make that change, which would have worked against its declared aim of bundling light from several sources to raise power, so only hindsight could produce it. On infringement the Court held that the claim does not require entirely lossless coupling, so slight leakage of light from the outer input fibres into the central core through a reflecting fluorine-doped cladding is not an overlying within the claim. The remedies were granted in full except that everything but the injunction and interim damages was limited to acts from 5 December 2021, the ground for that cut-off being redacted from the published text.