2025-11-18 - LD The Hague - Advanced Cell Diagnostics v. Molecular Instruments - UPC_CFI_187/2024
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_187/2024
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division
- Art:
- Decision
- Parteien:
- Advanced Cell Diagnostics, Inc. v. Molecular Instruments, Inc.
Kernaussage: The Hague LD found both EP 1,910,572 and EP 2,500,439 (RNA in situ hybridization) valid but not infringed.
2025-11-18 - LD The Hague - Advanced Cell Diagnostics
v.
Molecular Instruments - UPC_CFI_187/2024
notable
The Hague LD found both EP 1,910,572 and EP 2,500,439 (RNA in situ hybridization) valid but not infringed. The defendant's HCR Products used 1-4 nucleotide overlapping regions where patents required non-overlapping, precluding literal infringement. Equivalence rejected: (1) legal certainty — impossible to determine equivalent overlap amount, (2) patents not a very significant step, (3) overlap served independent technical function (reducing kinetic barrier to HCR signal amplification). All validity attacks dismissed — patents novel and inventive over Collins and Urdea, no added matter, no insufficiency. UK High Court reached opposite conclusion on same patents/products (invalid for obviousness).
Nichtigkeitsgründe
Art. 138 EPCNovelty
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“Patents novel over Collins and Urdea. Combination novelty attack with Kern not permitted.”
Inventive Step
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“No incentive to combine in situ with cruciform design. Collins taught away. Nine-year gap confirmed non-obviousness.”
Added Matter
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
“All added matter arguments dismissed. Claims not limited to single embodiment.”
Insufficiency of Disclosure
Patent survived (this ground)Art. 83 EPC · Art. 138(1)(b) EPC
“Squeeze argument not substantiated.”