1. Key takeaways
Applications on change of language require substantiated reasons
The Applicant requested for a change of language from German into English (Art. 49(5) UPCA, R. 322 RoP). It argued that both parties were English speaking companies, that it was an SME and translation costs would be disproportionately disadvantageous for it. Also, this would enable the CoA to use English later, if needed. According to the LD Duesseldorf, this submission was not sufficient (no specifics on translations costs and on classification as SME). The mere interest of the Court itself to facilitate (appeal) proceedings cannot prevail. Thus, since Applicant failed to put forward any particular circumstances of the case which would suffice to raise a fairness issue affecting the possibility of organising efficiently its defence despite the timeframe of an application for provisional measures the application was rejected.
2. Division
LD Düsseldorf
3. UPC number
UPC_CoA_335/2023
4. Type of proceedings
Application for provisional measures, R. 323
5. Parties
Applicant: Curio Bioscience Inc.
Respondent: 10x Genomics Inc.
6. Patent(s)
EP 2 697 391
7. Body of legislation / Rules
R. 323 RoP; Art 49 UPCA
To view the full article, click here.
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.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.