2024-10-25 - LD Hamburg - 10x Genomics v. Vizgen - UPC_CFI_22/2023

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CFI_22/2023
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Hamburg (DE) Local Division
Art:
Order
Parteien:
10x Genomics, Inc. v. Vizgen, Inc.

Kernaussage: The judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division made a final confidentiality order under R.

2024-10-25 - LD Hamburg - 10x Genomics v. Vizgen - UPC_CFI_22/2023
🗂️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_22/2023 Text zuerst hier gespeichert
  • UPC_CFI_22/2023 (Sie lesen diesen hier)
🏛️Court of First Instance - Hamburg (DE) Local Division• Order
📅2024-10-25
🔢UPC_CFI_22/2023
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
10x Genomics, Inc.
Tilman MUELLER-STOY
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Vizgen, Inc.
Jérôme KOMMER
⚖️Infringement
🌐German
🤖🇬🇧

notable
The judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division made a final confidentiality order under R. 262A RoP over the greyed-out passages of the claimants' observations on the defendant's third production request, restricting access to the parties' outside attorneys and their secretariats as recorded in the CMS legal team, and excluding employees and representatives of the parties. The order sets out the standard of proof: the existence of a trade secret need not be established to the Court's conviction but only on a predominant probability, which the Division derived from Art. 9(1) and (2) subparagraph 2(a) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 speaking of 'alleged trade secrets' in the alternative, and from Art. 58 UPCA extending protection beyond trade secrets to personal data and other confidential information. Applying the R. 262A.5 RoP balance, the Division held that the claimants' reasons considerably outweighed the defendant's interest in unrestricted access, the defendant having raised no objection when invited to comment under R. 262A.4 RoP. The obligations bind the named persons beyond the end of the proceedings, are enforceable by a penalty payment, and expressly leave untouched the access their counsel has in the parallel US action before the District of Delaware. The Division noted that such an order is not appealable per se under R. 220.1 RoP, that no party had sought leave under R. 220.3 RoP, and that granting leave of its own motion was not called for.

Inoffiziell

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren