2025-04-02 - LD Mannheim - Fujifilm v. Kodak - UPC_CFI_359/2023

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CFI_359/2023
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Mannheim (DE) Local Division
Art:
Proceeding Decision
Parteien:
Fujifilm Corporation v. Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH

Kernaussage: The Mannheim LD revoked EP 3 476 616 in Germany for lack of inventive step and dismissed the infringement action.

2025-04-02 - LD Mannheim - Fujifilm v. Kodak - UPC_CFI_359/2023
🗂️Nur Fallakte
Eine Entscheidung, mehrere Registereinträge

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

  • UPC_CFI_359/2023 Text zuerst hier gespeichert
  • UPC_CFI_359/2023 (Sie lesen diesen hier)
🏛️Court of First Instance - Mannheim (DE) Local Division• Proceeding Decision
📅2025-04-02
🔢UPC_CFI_359/2023
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Fujifilm Corporation
Christof AUGENSTEIN
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Kodak GmbH
Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH
Kodak Holding GmbH
Elena HENNECKE
⚖️Infringement
🌐English

notable
The Mannheim LD revoked EP 3 476 616 in Germany for lack of inventive step and dismissed the infringement action. The missing feature (lightness L* >= 70) was obvious from common general knowledge. The court established that Art. 76(1) UPCA contains a strict application principle: defending dependent claims as new independent claims requires a formal R. 30 RoP application. This departs from Paris CD (UPC_CFI_310/2023). Public prior use rejected. Novelty upheld. No added matter (obvious error corrected).

Nichtigkeitsgründe

Art. 138 EPC
3 Gründe
Novelty
Art. 54 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“Novelty attacks over WO 379 and US 952 rejected. Reworking by inventor knowledge insufficient.”
Inventive Step
Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Patent invalid (this ground)
“Lack of inventive step from three starting points. Missing lightness feature obvious from common knowledge.”
Added Matter
Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
Patent survived (this ground)
“Obvious error in claim 6 correctable from specification context.”
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