UPC CFI LD Munich, 8 May 2024, housekeeping, re: withdrawal opt-out-, standing to sue, detailed description infringement and preliminary objections
11-06-2024 Print this page
Valid withdrawal of opt-out on behalf of NST by a representative included in the official list of patent attorneys kept by the Registrar pursuant to Art. 48.3 UPCA who was not required to justify with powers of attorney at the time of filing the application on behalf of NST (Rule 5.3(b)(i) RoP, Article 83.3 UPCA).
NST has full standing to sue for a declaration of infringement of EP’669 and for a related claim for damages as assignee of the original owner, including fot prior infringements (Rule 8.5 RoP). NST has provided documentary evidence of the assignment of the patent in suit and of all the related rights.
At this stage a detailed infringement outline and mapping of features for only one specific device by way of example is sufficient (Rule 13(n) RoP). At a later stage, it would be sufficient to show that this “infringement read” actually applies in the same way to all other devices included in a given list of infringing embodiments, if and to the extent that the infringement will be actually assessed.
Sound reasons of case management efficiency for preliminary objections of lack of jurisdiction raised by the Defendants to be deferred to a later stage of the proceeding (Rule 20.2 RoP, Article 41.3 UPCA). The exceptions are related to the claim for damages for Defendants’ activities in the territory of the United Kingdom or, more broadly and generally, to the entire claims for damages moved against TI.
