2025-06-16 - LD Düsseldorf - 10x Genomics v. Curio Bioscience - UPC_CFI_140/2024

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The Düsseldorf Local Division found direct infringement of an array claim and refused the parallel indirect-infringement claim on the corresponding method claim, on a construction that lets the clear wording of a method step override a purely functional reading. A step reciting release from the surface of the array requires that an array — an ordered arrangement of probes on a surface — still exist at the moment of release; where the accused process dissolves that arrangement one step earlier, the feature is not realised and the product is not a means suitable for carrying out the method. In the other direction the claim was read broadly: it prescribes nothing about how the distinct positions come about, so distributing carriers at random and mapping their positions afterwards falls inside it, and prior art the specification never mentions cannot be used to narrow it. The Court granted a permanent injunction, recall and destruction under Art. 64(2)(b) and (e) UPCA, information and accounting under Art. 25(a) with Art. 67 UPCA and Art. 68(3) UPCA, and a declaration of liability for damages, but refused publication because Art. 80 UPCA carries an element of sanction and the other measures already secured the claimant. Security for enforcement under Art. 82(2) UPCA with R. 118.8 RoP was refused: the defendant carries the initial burden and the question is decided on the same factors as an application under R. 158 RoP.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_140/2024