2025-06-17 - LD Hamburg - Teleflex Life Sciences Ii v. Speed Care Mineral - UPC_CFI_685/2024

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division dismissed an application under Art. 59(1) UPCA and R. 190, 191 RoP for an order compelling the defendant to produce technical specification documents about the manufacture of the attacked embodiment. She set out four requirements for such an order: the applicant must have presented evidence reasonably available to it, the evidence sought must be specified and lie in the other party's control, the other party's confidential information must be protected, and the order must satisfy proportionality, equity and fairness under Arts. 41(3) and 42 UPCA and Art. 3 of the Enforcement Directive. The application failed on the first: the claimant had itself submitted the test reports and images of the Technical University of Munich in support of its own allegation that the attacked embodiment contains a binder, and had further laboratory testing under way, so no lack of evidence on its side was apparent. Whether the tests already carried out are late or sufficient to establish infringement is not a question for a R. 190 RoP application but for the full panel in the main proceedings, and a production application must not become a route to further substantiation beyond the written pleadings the Rules provide for.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_685/2024