Markus Fuhrmann

In X ZR 92/23, the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) decided in nullity proceedings on the patentability of an active substance for the treatment of overactive bladder. A supplementary protection certificate for the respective medical product had been granted. The patent was challenged on the grounds of lack of patentability and accordingly was the certificate. The Federal Patent Court (FPJ) declared both rights invalid due to claim 1 not being inventive: The application of agonists at the same receptor and of actives for disorders of the bladder were known from the prior art, hence finding further applications for the known active substance forms the objective problem. In contrast, the BGH points out that actives disclosed in the prior art are used against other diseases or have a different mechanism of action and that the technical problem is the provision of an effective medicine for the treatment of overactive bladder. According to the case law of the FCJ, the technical problem must be formulated in such a general and neutral way that the question of what suggestions the skilled person received from the prior art in this respect arises exclusively in the examination of inventive step. The FCJ clarified that elements that are part of the solution must here not be taken into account and that in particular, it must not be assumed without further ado that the prior art was close to a particular problem. If there are reasonable doubts in this regard, the technical problem is to be formulated more abstractly. The FCJ states that the technical problem must not be formulated in terms of finding new fields of application or indications for an active before the examination of inventive step and that this task is not obvious already because of the patent to relate to an additional indication for a known active ingredient: Although the technical problem is to be developed from what the patent actually provides (Xa ZR 36/08; Xa ZR 28/08), this does not imply that it would be permissible to take into account elements of the protected solution when formulating the problem. #IntellectualProperty #PatentLaw #LegalProfessionals

12

1 Kommentar

VOSSIUS partner Dr. Marcus von Welser has written an article on the landmark decision of the Hamburg Regional Court. The court ruled that the copyright exception for text and data mining extends to downloading photos from the internet for AI training datasets (LG Hamburg, judgment of September 27, 2024, file number 310 O 227/23 - LAION). This is the first published judgment in the European Union dealing with the legal framework for the creation of AI training datasets. Read the full article on our website: https://lnkd.in/dR4ZJJu6 #ArtificialIntelligence #Copyright #AI #IntellectualProperty

8

Dr Heiner Kahlert and Maximilian Wegge have once again contributed to the chapter on dispute resolution in Germany in the 2024 Report on the online platform “Lexology”. This Report is part of the tool "Panoramic" , which provides in-house lawyers with answers to the most important legal and regulatory questions that may arise in business transactions and legal disputes in Germany. The Chapter focuses on the topics of court proceedings, arbitration proceedings, as well as alternative dispute resolution. We are pleased to continually be part of this annual publication. For more information on the annual report, please go to: https://lnkd.in/gaNqdeQQ #disputeresolution #litigation #Germany #lexology

23

🚨 BREAKING NEWS 🚨 Germany’s Highest Court Dismisses Lawsuit on OAL Pipeline. The Federal Administrative Court, the Supreme Court of Germany (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), today dismissed the lawsuits of two NGO's in relation to the planning and permitting of the Ostsee Anbindungsleitung (OAL) Project, a 50km offshore pipeline intended to connect two FSRU’s in the port of Mukran to the existing gas network in Germany.    In June 2022, the German government passed the LNG Acceleration Act (LNGG) to improve energy security. According to the LNGG, the national energy supply is to be secured by the rapid integration of liquefied natural gas into the existing gas transmission network. Shortly after the LNGG Act was passed, StreamTec Solutions AG (STS) began working on a conceptual design for an LNG Terminal which will be used to transport hydrogen in the future. The project was completed by STS and GASCADE in less than 18 months, a world record for this type of offshore pipeline construction.   The NGO’s had claimed that the OAL violated environmental legislation but the Federal Administrative Court rejected all of the plaintiffs' objections to the legality of the permit. The expedited implementation of the OAL serves the public interest for a secure and diversified gas supply to Germany and is necessary for reasons of overriding public interest and in the interest of public safety. The environmental assessments of construction-related impacts on reefs, marine mammals and resting birds have been carried out properly and the effects of the project on the global climate were accurately considered. The applicable nature conservation and species protection legislation have been met throughout the permitting process.   Lukas Brunnschweiler, Permitting Manager of StreamTec Solutions AG added “We are pleased with today’s court ruling. It confirms that, despite the ultra fast-track nature of the project, the planning and permitting was meticulously executed by STS and our client GASCADE to limit environmental impact and in accordance with the applicable legislation." For more information on the announcement, visit: https://lnkd.in/dKUVeyw4 #Gascade #Hydrogenready #LNG #Hydrogen #Gaspipeline #EnergyInfrastructure #OffshoreProjects #balticsea #SustainableFuture #GreenEnergy

70

2 Kommentare

The Court of Justice of the European Union issued a decision on a preliminary ruling requested by a German court in relation to a potential breach of restrictive measures issued against Russia. The request in question related to whether the provision of authentication services by a German notary fell within the remit of Council Regulation (EU) No 833/2014. Find out more here https://lnkd.in/dm7sGmhC #EU #sanctions #restrictive #measures #preliminary #reference #court #justice #legal #advisory #services #mamotcv

8

#UPCdatabase #decisionoftheweek LD Mannheim, 13 June 2024, Order of the Court of first instance, UPC_CFI_219/2023 #localdivision #mannheimlocaldivision #extensionofdeadline #frand #infringementaction #protectionofconfidentialinformation #r262arop ! Key takeaways: Extension of time limit (only) for response to redacted FRAND submission: Claimant filed its reply brief with heavy redactions re. the FRAND part. Hence, upon Defendant’s request, the deadline for filing its rejoinder brief was extended as it relates to these redactions. However, as the parts re. infringement and validity of the patent were not ...

8

On 24 July 2024, four months after the publication of the draft bill, the German Federal Cabinet adopted the government draft to transpose CSRD into German law. In doing so, the EU Member State fell short of the EU deadline (6 July 2024) by just over 2 weeks. Germany represents 24% of all EU CSRD report preparers and more than 11 000 undertakings (CEPS 2022). The government draft was published on the website of the German Federal Ministry of Justice together with a synopsis and an information paper: https://lnkd.in/eKY4hUGv The information paper is interesting. It specifies that CSRD is transposed according to the so-called “1:1 principle”, meaning that the requirements of European law should not be exceeded: “The burdens of EU law should not be increased by national regulatory ambitions, as was often the case in the past through so-called ‘gold plating’.” The paper also answers the question “why did Germany not prevent the directive from being adopted at EU level?”: “The CSRD negotiations were already largely conducted by the previous government. They were practically completed when the new federal government came into office. It would have isolated Germany if it had tried to stop what the previous government had promised at the last minute.” “A German rejection would not have prevented the adoption of the CSRD. The federal government therefore decided to participate constructively in order to at least push through improvements to the drafts in favor of companies.” The information paper also specifies that: “The extent of the reporting obligations is largely determined by the European sustainability reporting standards, which were only adopted as a delegated act in 2023 - one year after the agreement on the directive. The Federal Government did not support the decision on the European sustainability reporting standards.” Source: https://lnkd.in/e79G4usp   Stay tuned for more CSRD and ESRS insights.    #getCSRDready, #CSRD, #ESRS, #CSDDD, #ESG, #Strategy, #Governance, #SustainabilityReporting, #Digitalisation, #CleeritESG

31

The application for changing the proceeding's language from German to English was initially rejected at the first instance. The decision was appealed at the UPC's Court of Appeal (CoA). Based on an urgent interest in filing their statement of defense in the first instance proceedings in English (due 22 December 2023), the appellants requested the CoA to give the respondent a deadline for a response of 5 working days and to render a decision, if possible, at least three days before 22 December 2023, pursuant to R.9.3(b) RoP. According to Art.9.1 of the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, any panel of the CoA shall consist of five judges in a multinational composition: three legally qualified judges who are nationals of different Contracting Member States, and two technically qualified judges. The CoA decided with three legally qualified judges. In consistency with the logic underlying the composition of the panels of the Court of First Instance (Art.8 UPCA and R.33, 34, 37.3, 57, and 72 RoP) and by analogy with Art.9.2 UPCA, a procedural request, where no technical issues are at hand, can be adjudicated by three legally qualified judges. This also ensures efficient proceedings and expeditious decisions. Finally, it is in conformity with paragraphs 2 - 4 of the Preamble of the RoP, according to which the Rules shall be applied and interpreted in accordance with Art.41(3), 42, and 52(1) UPCA based on the principles of proportionality, flexibility, fairness, and equity. Proportionality shall be ensured by giving due consideration to the nature and complexity of each action and its importance. Flexibility shall be ensured by applying all procedural rules in a flexible and balanced manner with the required level of discretion for the judges to organize the proceedings in the most efficient and cost-effective manner. The appellant filed the request for the expedition of the appeal, along with the statement of appeal, having used the full 15 days available under R.224.1(b) and R.224.2(b) RoP. Even if their request had been granted the next day, it would give the respondent only 4 working days to respond and would require the CoA to decide the case on the same day, without the opportunity to hear the parties. The CoA rejected the appeal and argued that the appellant had insufficiently considered the interests of the respondent to be given sufficient time to prepare its response, in proportion to the time the appellant itself had taken to prepare its grounds of appeal. Allowing the request would be contrary to the aforementioned principles, to be considered when applying the RoP. Unless the appellant must soon lodge the statement in German, the interests of the respondent and the principles of due process outweigh the interests of the appellant. #patents #intellectualproperty #UPC #CoA #proceedings #ip The relevant case numbers are: UPC Court of Appeal UPC_CoA_478/2023 App_594342/2023

3

Join our partners Johannes Lang and Dr. Patrick Heckeler for the next insightful #IPExpertsLIVE session, this time on revocation actions under the Unified Patent Court (UPC) System. You will gain valuable knowledge on: ✅The framework and jurisdiction of the UPC in revocation matters ✅Key stages and procedural requirements in revocation actions ✅Strategic approaches to effectively challenge patent validity ✅The most recent case law concerning patentability 👉Do you want to stay current with UPC practices and enhance your strategic approach to patent revocation? Then register now: https://lnkd.in/dcEx6c88 #IntellectualProperty #Patents #UPC #Litigation #revocation

15

In line with the revocation decision of the Paris Local Division regarding EP 866 of 4 July 2024 (https://lnkd.in/eA9GPG4k), the Munich Local Division also revoked the divisional paten EP 685 for lack of inventive step in its decision of 31 July 2024 in Dexcom v Abbott: https://lnkd.in/eA83WTVH Noteworthy is that these decisions by the UPC Local Divisions in Munich and Paris were made against the backdrop of earlier decisions regarding EP 866 by the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office of 20 April 2023 (upheld) and a qualified note of the German Federal Patent Court in which it did set out its preliminary view that EP ‘866 is invalid. The Munich decision also contains a standard for novelty review. For UPC case law on novelty (article 54 EPC): https://lnkd.in/eWuYcJJr #upc, #upcnugget

10

📢 The Bundeskartellamt has concluded its Facebook proceeding ℹ In February 2019 the Bundeskartellamt prohibited Facebook from combining personal user data from different sources without their consent. The proceeding is now considered groundbreaking, not least because it led to the Federal Court of Justice (2020) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (2023) confirming the Bundeskartellamt's position on matters of principle in a legal dispute which had lasted several years. In the course of these proceedings, Meta and the Bundeskartellamt also intensively negotiated concrete measures to implement the authority’s decision. 👉 The Bundeskartellamt now considers Meta’s individual measures to be a sufficiently effective package, allowing the authority to close the case. Meta has withdrawn the appeal pending before the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court (OLG Düsseldorf) against the Bundeskartellamt’s decision. The decision is thus final. ✅ As a result, Facebook users now have significantly improved options regarding the combination of their personal data. The main change is that users can now decide for themselves which data from other Meta accounts or other online sources are combined with their Facebook data. The press release is available at ➡ https://lnkd.in/eQzzjbf8 A detailed case summary is available at ➡ https://lnkd.in/e95ttYmW #Meta #personaldata #Bundeskartellamt #competition

40

1 Kommentar

📚 The #AIDA Country Report on #Austria is OUT   ➡️In 2023, 58,686 international protection applications were lodged in Austria. This represented an almost 50% decrease from 2022 (Austria’s record year).   ➡️At the same time, almost 30,000 cases were discontinued due to the onward travel of applicants to other countries. Of the 70,000 decisions taken at first instance in 2023, 43% were formal decisions in cases of people having moved onwards after having lodged their applications.   ➡️As of January 2024, approximately 70,000 Ukrainians who had entered Austria since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 were registered in Austria’s Central Register of Residence.   ➡️The debated system of legal counselling and representation, which had been introduced in 2021, was deemed unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court in December 2023.   ➡️The drop in asylum applications also partly relieved the pressure on Austria’s reception system. Several locations were either permanently or temporarily closed in the final quarter of 2023. However, the lack of co-operation between the federal basic care system, which is responsible for asylum applicants during the admissibility phase, and the provinces, which are responsible during the rest of the procedure, persisted and, as a result, some asylum applicants stayed in federal facilities for longer than necessary.    ➡️Finally, there was a sharp increase in applications for asylum via the family reunification process in 2023, as the authorities worked on a backlog of Syrian protection cases.   Read the full report here: 🔗https://bit.ly/3VSz2NX

14

🇭🇺 #Hungary is making headlines! ✨ In response to the Declaration by 26 EU Member States and the EU aiming to render the #ECT inapplicable in intra-EU disputes retroactively, Hungary has issued a separate Declaration. Hungary emphasizes that EU Member States must respect public international law, and asserts that the disapplication of the ECT in intra-EU disputes can only be achieved in line with the #VCLT. Kudos to Szabolcs Nagy, Trade and Investment diplomat at the Permanent Representation of Hungary to the EU, for this achievement. Read the analysis of this development on #GlobalArbitrationReview and #KluwerArbitrationBlog. A big thank you to GAR and KAB for shedding light on this important development, which holds significant implications for Hungary, the ECT, and the intricate interplay between EU law and public international law. #InternationalLaw #EULaw #ECT #Hungary #PublicInternationalLaw https://lnkd.in/em-YkuVV

14

1 Kommentar

We are proud to once again receive top recognition in the latest edition of JUVE Patent #Germany 2024. Notably, JUVE Patent ranks df-mp as a top tier 5-star firm for patent attorneys handling #PatentLitigation in Germany. JUVE Patent writes: “This Munich IP law firm has been an undisputed market leader in patent litigation conducted by patent attorneys for many years. It is one of the few litigation law firms in Germany that handles proceedings concerning #pharmaceutical/ #biotech and #MobileCommunication patents at the same level. This is backed up by a renowned team of partners. While pharmaceutical experts H. Ulrich Dörries, Elisabeth Greiner and Sandra Pohlman represent both pharma innovators and generic drug manufacturers, David Molnia and Dominik Ho enjoy an excellent reputation for representing manufacturers and NPEs in SEP proceedings.” Our #PatentProsecution practice remains highly rated and df-mp is additionally ranked as a recommended firm for #PatentFiling in Germany in the fields of pharma and biotechnology and digital communication and computer technology.   Special recognition goes to the following recommended individuals: H. Ulrich Dörries (Pharma and biotechnology) Sandra Pohlman (Pharma and biotechnology) Elisabeth Greiner (Pharma and biotechnology) David Molnia (Digital communication and computer technology) Dominik Ho (Digital communication and computer technology) Alexandre Hoffmann (Digital communication and computer technology) #dfmp #JuvePatent #JuveRanking #PatentExperts

46

3 Kommentare

In X ZR 42/22, the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) decided in nullity proceedings on the patentability of a process for manufacturing an embossed sheet metal. The patent in suit, among others, claimed the production of "recessed and raised structures with respect to a high-gloss surface defined as a reference plane." The Federal Patent Court (FPC) declared the patent invalid insofar as its subject matter went beyond the version defended by one of the auxiliary requests submitted during the proceedings. The action for annulment was dismissed by the FCJ. A central aspect of the decision was the question of whether the combination of recessed and raised structures provided for in claim 1 of the patent in suit was to be taken from the asserted prior art documents. At least according to the wording, the disclosure of one of the prior art documents would have permitted such a combination by mentioning the application or removal of a coating. However, for the FCJ it was not sufficiently clear from the document that, in deviation from its embodiments, the processing forms of application and removal, respectively, could optionally be combined with the same workpiece. Consistent with previous case law, the FCJ points out that when determining the disclosure content of a prior art document, individual formulations must not be considered in isolation. Rather, they must be assessed in their context, i.e., against the background of the entire content of the prior art document. (Confirmation of FCJ decisions X ZR 11/17 and X ZR 59/21). #IntellectualProperty #PatentLaw #IPStrategy #LegalExperts

9

1 Kommentar

#UPCdatabase #decisionoftheweek LD Düsseldorf, July 3, 2024, judgment on prior use right, award of damages and order to communicate information / lay open books, UPC_CFI_7/2023 #DuesseldorfLocalDivision #communication #information #IndirectUse #InfringementActivities #DistributionChannels #removal #accounts #retrospective #timeextension #PriorUse ! Key takeaways: Within the framework of Art. 28 UPCA, the user of the claimed technology can only invoke the rights granted to him by the respective national regulations of the respective contracting member states. On this basis, the existence of a right based on prior use of the invention must be substantiated for each of the protected ...

15