1. Key takeaways
Reference to dependent claims by the parties for the first time in the oral proceedings for the interpretation of the independent claims may not be late.
The interpretation of a patent claim is a matter of law. The Court must independently construe the claims. The first reference to (further) subclaims at the oral hearing may be admissible provided that the feature in question was already in dispute and the subclaims merely provide additional arguments in support of the party's previously expressed opinion.
The description and the drawings must always be taken into account as aids to the interpreation of the claim and not only to resolve any ambiguities in the claim.
The claim is not only the starting point but also the decisive basis for determining the scope of protection (Art. 69 EPC). The interpretation of a claim does not depend solely on its precise wording in the linguistic sense. The description and drawings must also be taken into account. This does not mean, that the claim only serves as a guideline and that its subject-matter also extends to that which, after examination of the description and drawings, appears to be the protection sought by the patentee.
If several embodiments are presented in the description as being in accordance with the invention, the terms used in the claim are to be understood, in case of doubt, as meaning that all embodiments can be used to fulfil them.
The same applies for subclaims, which do not normally narrow the scope of the independent claim. They merely demonstrate possibilities for its design, which may offer an additional advantage.
2. Division
Local Division Düsseldorf
3. UPC number
UPC_CFI_140/2024
4. Type of proceedings
Infringement action
5. Parties
Claimant: 10x Genomics, Inc.
Defendant: Curio Bioscience Inc.
6. Patent(s)
EP 2 697 391 B1
7. Body of legislation / Rules
Art. 69 EPC
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.
