2026-02-19 - LD Vienna - Sabert Corporation Europe v. Messerle - UPC_CFI_375/2025

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CFI_375/2025
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Vienna (AT) Local Division
Art:
Decision
Parteien:
Sabert Corporation Europe S.A. v. Messerle GmbH

Kernaussage: The Vienna LD dismissed both Messerle's infringement action and Sabert's revocation counterclaim regarding EP 3 705 415 (food packaging with cardboard tray and lid).

2026-02-19 - LD Vienna - Sabert Corporation Europe v. Messerle - UPC_CFI_375/2025
🗂️Nur Fallakte
Eine Entscheidung, mehrere Aktenzeichen

Das Gericht hat diese Verfahren zusammen entschieden und dasselbe Dokument in jedem davon eingestellt. Jeder Eintrag unten ist ein eigener vollwertiger Registereintrag.

🏛️Court of First Instance - Vienna (AT) Local Division• Decision
📅2026-02-19
🔢UPC_CFI_375/2025
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Sabert Corporation Europe S.A.
Mireille BUYDENS
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Messerle GmbH
⚖️Counter claim for revocation
🌐English

notable
The Vienna LD dismissed both Messerle's infringement action and Sabert's revocation counterclaim regarding EP 3 705 415 (food packaging with cardboard tray and lid). The court interpreted the German term 'Knick' as requiring a visible sharp crease, not a gradual bend, which the Tray2Go product did not have. On validity, the court upheld the patent: D4 (a commercial brochure) was the only admissible prior art — physical product samples and Ebay evidence (Enclosures J, M, N, O, P) were excluded as late-filed. The court established that a commercial brochure is a stand-alone piece of prior art; obtaining the physical product cannot establish the brochure's disclosure content. D4 failed to disclose features on at least two side walls. Inventive step was upheld as no pointer existed to modify D4 toward the claimed solution.

Nichtigkeitsgründe

Art. 138 EPC
2 Gründe
Novelty
Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“Novelty upheld over D4 (Solut! commercial brochure). D4 did not disclose features 6, 8 on at least two side walls — only one side visible. Physical product samples (Enc. J) excluded as late-filed. Prior public use insufficiently proven. [39-72]”
Inventive Step
Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“Inventive step upheld. D4 as realistic starting point but no pointer to modify toward claimed solution (features 6 and 8/9). D5 not a realistic starting point — no lid, paper not cardboard. [73-102]”
Feststellungen aus Sicht des Patentinhabers bezeichnet. Quelle: KI-Klassifikation (AI)

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren