1. Key takeaways
Three sucessive stages of the written procedure in infringement actions
The Rules of Procedure devide the written procedure into several successive stages:
Stage 1: Pleadings relating to the infringement claim comprising a set of 4 statements
Stage 2: Pleadings relating to the validity of the patent-in-suit in the event of a counterclaim for revocation
Stage 3: Pleadings relating to the amendment of the patent-in-suit, if requested.
In stages 2 (pleadings re. validity) and 3 (pleadings re. application to amend) of the proceedings pleadings concerning infringement are inadmissible but can be admitted if accompanied by a reasoned request pursuant R. 36 RoP
The judge-rapporteur rejected pleadings by the claimant filed in stages insofar as they related to infringement. However, based on R. 36 RoP, the judge-rapporteur admitted an additional pleading of the claimant, limited to a response to new arguments presented by the defendant in their last brief on infringement (i.e., in stage 1 ) and a response thereto by the Defendants without adjusting the timeframe of the proceedings.
2. Division
Paris Local Division
3. UPC number
UPC_CFI_163/2024
4. Type of proceedings
Infringement Action
5. Parties
Applicant/Claimant: Hurom Co., Ltd
Respondents/Defendants: NUC Electronics Co., Ltd, NUC Electronics Europe GmbH, Warmcoo
6. Patent(s)
EP3155936
7. Body of legislation / Rules
Rule 12 RoP
Rule 36 RoP
Rule 32.3 RoP
LD Paris_App_4027_2025_Ord_4336_2025_ Hurom_en
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
