ARTICLE
30 July 2025

LD Munich, July 22, 2025, Order On Evidence Preservation And Inspection, UPC_CFI_63/2025

BP
Bardehle Pagenberg

Contributor

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG combines the expertise of attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. As one of the largest IP firms in Europe, BARDEHLE PAGENBERG advises in all fields of Intellectual Property, including all procedures before the patent and trademark offices as well as litigation before the courts through all instances.
The court clarified the distinction between a deadline's length and starting point under Rule 198.1 RoP. While the length is prescribed, the court can determine...
Germany Intellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

Deadline Length vs. Starting Point

The court clarified the distinction between a deadline's length and starting point under Rule 198.1 RoP. While the length is prescribed, the court can determine the starting point, especially considering the expert report's due date (Rule 196.4 RoP).

Discretion to Change Starting Point

The court can adjust the starting point, especially if the expert report is delayed (Rule 198.1 RoP).

2. Division

Local Division Munich

3. UPC number

UPC_CFI_63/2025

4. Type of proceedings

Interim proceedings / Proceedings for evidence preservation and inspection

5. Parties

Applicant: Nanoval GmbH & Co. KG
Respondent: ALD Vacuum Technologies GmbH

6. Patent(s)

EP 3 083 107

7. Jurisdictions

UPC

8. Body of legislation / Rules

Rule 198.1 RoP, Rule 9.4 RoP, Rule 333 RoP, Rule 196.4 RoP, Rule 300(a) RoP, Article 48(6) UPCA
Rule 291 RoP

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More