2025-01-22 - CD Paris - NJOY v. VMR Products - UPC_CFI_310/2023

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CFI_310/2023
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat
Art:
Application Order
Parteien:
NJOY Netherlands B.V. v. VMR Products LLC

Kernaussage: The Paris CD partially revoked EP '453 (vaporizer) in a revocation action by NJOY against VMR Products (Juul subsidiary).

2025-01-22 - CD Paris - NJOY v. VMR Products - UPC_CFI_310/2023
🗂️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_310/2023 Text zuerst hier gespeichert
  • UPC_CFI_310/2023 (Sie lesen diesen hier)
🏛️Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat• Application Order
📅2025-01-22
🔢UPC_CFI_310/2023
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
NJOY Netherlands B.V.
Henrik HOLZAPFEL
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
VMR Products LLC
Bernhard THUM
⚖️Revocation
🌐English

notable
The Paris CD partially revoked EP '453 (vaporizer) in a revocation action by NJOY against VMR Products (Juul subsidiary). Independent claim 1 lacked inventive step over Pan combined with Weigensberg and/or Trescher, as the only distinguishing feature (charging contacts at first end) was obvious. All eight auxiliary requests failed: AR I-II were inadmissible as late R. 30.2 amendments constituting a change of strategy; AR III-V did not overcome the invalidity; AR VI-VIII were rejected for lack of clarity under Art. 84 EPC. However, the court upheld the patent on dependent claims 6, 7, 8 (magnets proximate to charging contacts) under Art. 65(3) UPCA, finding the defendant's general request to maintain dependent claims sufficiently clear even without specifying which claims. The court held that the problem-solution approach is not mandatory and that assessment based on multiple starting points is equally permissible.

Nichtigkeitsgründe

Art. 138 EPC
2 Gründe
Inventive Step
Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
Partially invalid (this ground)
“Independent claim 1 lacked inventive step over Pan + Weigensberg/Trescher [101, 110]. Dependent claims 2-5, 9-11 also lacked inventive step. However, dependent claims 6, 7, 8 (magnets proximate to charging contacts) were found to involve an inventive step [157, 169, 175].”
Clarity
Art. 84 EPC · derivative
Patent invalid (this ground)
“Auxiliary requests VI-VIII rejected for lack of clarity under Art. 84 EPC — the term 'free-standing fluid' was found unclear and the defendant provided no definition or useful arguments [134-137].”
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