2024-12-11 - LD Paris - DexCom v. Abbott et al. - UPC_CFI_395/2023
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_395/2023
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division
- Art:
- Order
- Parteien:
- DexCom, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Abbott France, Abbott, Abbott B.V., Abbott S.r.l., Abbott Scandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott Oy, Abbott Gesellschaft m.b.H., Abbott Laboratories A/S, Abbott GmbH, Abbott Diagnostics GmbH, Abbott Logistics B.V., Newyu,Inc.
Kernaussage: The Paris Local Division revoked EP 3 831 282 (DexCom's continuous glucose monitoring remote-monitoring patent) in its entirety across 18 UPC Contracting Member States.
2024-12-11 - LD Paris - DexCom
v.
Abbott et al. - UPC_CFI_395/2023
notable
The Paris Local Division revoked EP 3 831 282 (DexCom's continuous glucose monitoring remote-monitoring patent) in its entirety across 18 UPC Contracting Member States. On claim construction, the panel adopted the UPC Court of Appeal's 10x Genomics/Nanostring standard (UPC_CoA_335/2023; UPC_CoA_1/2024), treating the claim wording as the decisive basis while using the description and drawings as explanatory aids. Claim 1 was held obvious over Valdes combined with Goodnow — server-based architecture and the patient-to-HCP invitation scheme were both known in the CGM field. All three auxiliary requests were rejected for adding matter contrary to Art. 138(1)(c) EPC, the panel finding that the added 'server-stores-rules' features conflicted with features 1.4-1.6 of claim 1. The panel also held inadmissible under Rule 9.2 RoP Abbott's late-raised added-matter ground against the patent as granted, ruling that a Rule 36 order permitting further argument on claim-interpretation terms does not authorise a new ground of revocation in a front-loaded system. Infringement claims dismissed; DexCom ordered to bear costs.
Nichtigkeitsgründe
Art. 138 EPCInventive Step
Patent invalid (this ground)Art. 56 EPC · Art. 138(1)(a) EPC
“Claim 1 (and dependent/independent claims 2-15) held obvious over Valdes in combination with Goodnow — server architecture and patient-initiated invitation scheme both disclosed in prior art of the same CGM field [73-103].”
Added Matter
Patent invalid (this ground)Art. 123(2) EPC · Art. 138(1)(c) EPC
“All three auxiliary requests held to add matter under Art. 138(1)(c) EPC — the 'server stores rules' features introduce technical teachings inconsistent with features 1.4-1.6 of claim 1 and not directly and unambiguously derivable from WO 631 [119-141].”