2025-07-10 - LD Hamburg - Nera Innovations v. Xiaomi - UPC_CFI_173/2024

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CFI_173/2024
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Hamburg (DE) Local Division
Art:
Proceeding Decision
Parteien:
Nera Innovations Ltd. v. Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Inc., Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH

Kernaussage: The Hamburg Local Division dismissed Nera Innovations' infringement action against Xiaomi concerning EP 2,642,632 (wireless charging receiver technology) while partially upholding the counterclaim for revocation.

2025-07-10 - LD Hamburg - Nera Innovations v. Xiaomi - UPC_CFI_173/2024
🗂️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 - Hamburg (DE) Local Division• Proceeding Decision
📅2025-07-10
🔢UPC_CFI_173/2024
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Nera Innovations Ltd.
Thomas ADAM
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd.
Xiaomi Inc.
Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.
Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH
Eva ACKER
⚖️Infringement
🌐German
🤖🇬🇧

notable
The Hamburg Local Division dismissed Nera Innovations' infringement action against Xiaomi concerning EP 2,642,632 (wireless charging receiver technology) while partially upholding the counterclaim for revocation. The patent was found to contain two inadmissible intermediate generalizations under Art. 123(2) EPC — omitting 'magnetic' from 'substrate' and omitting the predetermined-shape requirement from 'receiving space' — but was maintained in amended form (Auxiliary Requests 1+2). Novelty was confirmed over all six prior art documents, and inventive step was upheld because the cited documents from the NFC/RFID field were not realistic starting points for wireless charging. However, infringement was denied because the accused Xiaomi smartphones lack a receiving space that fully penetrates the substrate as required by the patent.

Nichtigkeitsgründe

Art. 138 EPC
3 Gründe
Novelty
Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“Patent (as amended) found novel over all six prior art documents. Key distinguishing feature was the receiving space with predetermined shape requiring full substrate penetration.”
Inventive Step
Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“D5+D6 combination (both NFC/RFID documents) did not render the patent obvious — different application field not a realistic starting point.”
Added Matter
Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
Patent invalid (this ground)
“Two features constituted inadmissible intermediate generalizations under Art. 123(2)/(3) EPC: omission of magnetic qualifier for substrate and omission of predetermined-shape requirement for receiving space.”
Feststellungen aus Sicht des Patentinhabers bezeichnet. Quelle: KI-Klassifikation (AI)

Inoffiziell

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren