ip litigation in the courts of düsseldorf
Post on 01-Jan-2022
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
IP IP LitigationLitigation in in thethe CourtsCourts of of DDüüsseldorfsseldorfJens Jens KKüünzelnzel, LL.M., LL.M.
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENKRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENMarchMarch 19, 200419, 2004
Joint Seminar of Joint Seminar of PolishPolish and German and German GroupsGroups of of AIPPIAIPPI
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
22
IntroductionIntroduction//OutlineOutline
Basic Basic factsfacts of IP of IP litigationlitigation in in DDüüsseldorfsseldorfFocus on Patent Focus on Patent LitigationLitigation
1.1. GenerallyGenerally: German : German courtcourt systemsystemand and howhow patent patent litigationlitigation fitsfits intointo itit
2.2. SomeSome statisticsstatistics establishingestablishingsignificancesignificance of Dof Düüsseldorf on sseldorf on thetheEuropean European stagestage
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
33
IntroductionIntroduction//OutlineOutline
3.3. IdentifyIdentify factorsfactors forfor high high regardregard and and effectivenesseffectiveness of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation
4.4. Basic Basic factsfacts on on litigationlitigation concerningconcerningotherother IP IP rightsrights in Din Düüsseldorf sseldorf ((copyrightscopyrights, , trademarkstrademarks, , designsdesigns as as well as unfair well as unfair competitioncompetition))
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
44
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
UnderstandingUnderstanding of of systemsystem isis a a prepre--conditioncondition forfor understandingunderstanding thetheeffectivenesseffectiveness of of thethe DDüüsseldorf sseldorf procedureprocedure
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
55
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
Patent Patent mattersmatters areare dealt dealt withwith bybyGerman German ordinaryordinary civil civil courtscourtsAlmost all German Almost all German statesstates havehavecreatedcreated specialisedspecialised Patent Chambers Patent Chambers withwith exclusiveexclusive jurisdictionjurisdiction in in thethestatestate12 German Patent Chambers 12 German Patent Chambers existexistnationwidenationwide
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
66
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
DDüüsseldorf sseldorf DistrictDistrict Court Court accomodatesaccomodates oneone of of thesethese specialisedspecialisedpatent patent courtscourts ((actuallyactually twotwoindependent independent chamberschambers))Ratio of Ratio of exclusiveexclusive jurisdictionjurisdiction: : ConcentrationConcentration of of knowledgeknowledge and and experienceexperienceJurisdictionJurisdiction forfor thethe respectiverespective statestate
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
77
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
Patent Patent ChamberChamber DDüüsseldorf (4a and sseldorf (4a and 4b Chambers) has 4b Chambers) has statewidestatewideexclusiveexclusive jurisdictionjurisdiction in (in (i.ai.a.).)
a)a) Patent and Patent and utilityutility modelmodel mattersmatters,,b)b) EmployeeEmployee‘‘ss inventioninvention casescases,,c)c) Plant Plant protectionprotection casescases,,d)d) Unfair Unfair competitioncompetition ((technicaltechnical
productsproducts))
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
88
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
e)e) Antitrust Antitrust casescases, as far as , as far as theytheyoriginateoriginate fromfrom licenselicense agreementsagreementsoverover thesethese IP IP rightsrights oror fromfromtrademarktrademark licenselicense agreementsagreements
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
99
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
InfringementInfringement casescases areare technicallytechnicallycivil civil casescasesBothBoth partiesparties havehave to to bebe representedrepresentedbyby a German a German attorneyattorney at at lawlaw ((mostlymostlyspecialisedspecialised withwith experienceexperience))ParticipationParticipation of patent of patent attorneyattorneyhighlyhighly recommendedrecommendedJudgesJudges areare lawyerslawyers, no , no technicaltechnicalexpertsexperts
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1010
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
TaskTask of of attorneysattorneys isis to to „„translatetranslate““ thethetechnicaltechnical problemsproblems to to thethe judgesjudgesOne One reasonreason forfor specialisationspecialisation::JudgesJudges becomebecome „„trainedtrained““ to to understandunderstand technicaltechnical setssets of of factsfacts
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1111
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
Patent Patent chamberschambers onlyonly havehavejurisdictionjurisdiction to to decidedecide infringementinfringement, , notnot validityvalidity, of IP , of IP rightsrights, in , in particularparticularpatentspatentsTwoTwo--columncolumn oror „„dualdual““ systemsystemessential essential forfor thethe German patent German patent litigationlitigation systemsystem
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1212
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
InfringementInfringement mattersmatters dealt dealt withwith bybyordinaryordinary civil civil courtscourts likelike DDüüsseldorfsseldorfQuestionsQuestions of of validityvalidity areare domaindomain of of thethe Federal Patent Court and Federal Patent Court and thetheoppositionopposition boardsboards at at thethe grantinggrantingauthoritiesauthorities
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1313
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
Split in Split in competencescompetences has grave has grave consequencesconsequences ((substantivesubstantive patent patent lawlaw andand litigationlitigation procedureprocedure))EnsuresEnsures, in , in effecteffect, , concentrationconcentration on on infringementinfringement
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1414
1. Patent 1. Patent mattersmatters insideinside thethe German German courtcourt systemsystem
Dual Dual systemsystem essentiallyessentially differsdiffers fromfromtreatmenttreatment of patent of patent litigationlitigation in in otherotherjurisdictionsjurisdictionsE.gE.g. London High Court (. London High Court (ChanceryChanceryDivision, Patents Court) Division, Patents Court) ––counterclaimscounterclaims forfor declarationdeclaration of of nullitynullity
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1515
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationDDüüsseldorf Patent Chambers: sseldorf Patent Chambers: incomingincoming casescases
1.1. 20012001--2003 on 2003 on averageaverage approxapprox. 600 . 600 newnew casescases
2.2. 2003: absolute 2003: absolute officialofficial figurefigure 545 545 casescases
3.3. Not all of Not all of themthem infringementinfringement actionsactions
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1616
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigation
4.4. EstimateEstimate: 250 to 300 patent : 250 to 300 patent infringementinfringement actionsactions per per yearyear((includingincluding utilityutility modelsmodels and and specifiedspecified damagesdamages claimsclaims))
London High Court/Patents London High Court/Patents CountyCountyCourt:Court: incomingincoming casescases
1.1. DDüüsseldorf sseldorf figurefigure threethree timestimes higherhigher
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1717
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigation
2.2. Report EPLA Nov. 2001 (Report EPLA Nov. 2001 (basedbased on on casescases 19901990--1999 on 1999 on averageaverage): 100 ): 100 patent patent casescases per per yearyear ((notnot all of all of themthem infringementinfringement actionsactions))
Paris Court: Paris Court: incomingincoming casescases1.1. Report Report VeronVeron Nov. 2001 (1990Nov. 2001 (1990--
1999 1999 averageaverage))2.2. 118 118 infringementinfringement actionsactions per per yearyear
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1818
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationDDüüsseldorf Patent Chambers: sseldorf Patent Chambers: casescasesheardheard and and decideddecided
1.1. BetweenBetween ½½ and and ¾¾ of of incomingincomingcasescases heardheard and and decideddecided eacheach yearyear
2.2. Ranging on Ranging on averageaverage betweenbetween 180 180 and 225 and 225 hearingshearings and and decisionsdecisions p.ap.a..
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
1919
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationLondon High Court: London High Court: casescases heardheardand and decideddecided
1.1. CasesCases heardheard in 2003: in 2003: approxapprox. 30. 302.2. CasesCases scheduledscheduled forfor hearinghearing in in
2004: 14 (2004: 14 (statusstatus: : MarchMarch 18, 200418, 20043.3. NumberNumber of of judgmentsjudgments belowbelow thesethese
figuresfigures4.4. Nov. 2001 EPLA Nov. 2001 EPLA reportreport: 2/3 of : 2/3 of
casescases settledsettled
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2020
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationParis Court: Paris Court: casescases heardheard and and decideddecided
1.1. VeronVeron reportreport Nov. 2001: 108 Nov. 2001: 108 judgmentsjudgments on on averageaverage in in yearsyears1990 to 19991990 to 1999
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2121
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationDDüüsseldorf, London, Paris ranging sseldorf, London, Paris ranging beforebefore ItalianItalian, , SpanishSpanish and and otherotherEuropean European venuesvenuesNot Not yetyet sufficientsufficient informationinformation on on Eastern European patent Eastern European patent litigationlitigationfiguresfigures
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2222
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationTwoTwo Chambers Chambers decidingdeciding patent patent mattersmatters in Din Düüsseldorf, 2nd sseldorf, 2nd ChamberChamberaddedadded in 2001in 2001still still numbernumber of of heardheard and and decideddecidedcasescases per per yearyear impressiveimpressiveApproxApprox. . twotwo to to threethree oral extensive oral extensive oral oral hearingshearings per per weekweek per per ChamberChamber
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2323
2. 2. FactsFacts on on thethe significancesignificance of of DDüüsseldorf in patent sseldorf in patent litigationlitigationWillingnessWillingness of Dof Düüsseldorf sseldorf judgesjudges to to adhereadhere to to selfself--imposedimposed rigidrigid time time scheduleschedule importantimportant factorfactor
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2424
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigationa)a) General General charactercharacter of civil of civil procedureprocedure
in Germanyin Germany•• StartingStarting point: civil point: civil procedureprocedure
essentiallyessentially reliesrelies on on writtenwrittenpreparationpreparation
•• WrittenWritten briefsbriefs shapedshaped and and guidedguidedbyby statutorystatutory rulesrules
•• RulesRules promotepromote concentrationconcentration and and comprehensivenesscomprehensiveness of of presentationpresentation
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2525
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• ConcentrationConcentration promotespromotes
effectivenesseffectiveness in oral in oral hearingshearings•• ComparisonComparison: London (UK) : London (UK) procedureprocedure
mainlymainly reliesrelies on oral on oral presentationpresentation(patent (patent casescases betweenbetween twotwo to ten to ten daysdays, , sometimessometimes moremore))
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2626
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• StatutoryStatutory proceduralprocedural rulesrules ensureensure
thatthat-- All All argumentsarguments areare presentedpresented in in
writtenwritten form (form (comprehensivecomprehensive briefsbriefs))-- To To bebe submittedsubmitted withinwithin tighttight courtcourt--
fixedfixed deadlinesdeadlines, , nonnon--submittancesubmittancesanctionedsanctioned byby riskrisk of of preclusionpreclusion
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2727
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• MeticulousMeticulous writtenwritten preparationpreparation isis
oneone prepre--conditioncondition forfor DDüüsseldorf sseldorf practicepractice to to usuallyusually decidedecide withoutwithoutexpertexpert
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2828
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigationb)b) TwoTwo--columncolumn, , oror „„dualdual““ systemsystem in in
GermanyGermany•• SeveralSeveral consequencesconsequences in in termsterms of of
procedureprocedure and and substantivesubstantive patent patent lawlaw::
-- No No directdirect defensedefense of of invalidityinvalidity of of patentpatent
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
2929
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation-- ImplicitImplicit examinationexamination byby infringementinfringement courtcourt
cancan onlyonly bebe mademade throughthrough a a motionmotion to to suspendsuspend duedue to to pendingpending nullitynullityactionaction//oppositionopposition
-- ReluctanceReluctance to to suspendsuspend in Din Düüsseldorf sseldorf -- Rationale: Grant of patent, and Rationale: Grant of patent, and thethe rightsrights
conferredconferred on on ownerowner, , wouldwould in in effecteffect bebedefeateddefeated ifif suspensionsuspension regularregular procedureprocedure, , no no jurisdictionjurisdiction of civil of civil courtscourts
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3030
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation-- AnotherAnother consequenceconsequence of of splitsplit in in
competencescompetences: : „„FormsteinFormstein--defensedefense““limitedlimited to to casescases of of allegedalleged equivalentequivalentinfringementinfringement
-- LiteralLiteral infringementsinfringements mustmust notnot bebedefendeddefended byby allegationallegation thatthat attackedattackedproductproduct was was obviousobvious fromfrom priorprior artart
-- OtherwiseOtherwise de factode facto decisiondecision on on patentabilitypatentability ((outsideoutside of of jurisdictionjurisdiction))
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3131
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• ExceptionException: : utilityutility modelsmodels and and designsdesigns
cancan bebe evaluatedevaluated byby Civil Civil CourtsCourts likelikeDDüüsseldorfsseldorf
•• No No systematicsystematic contradictioncontradiction withwith splitsplitin in competencescompetences as as thesethese IP IP rightsrightshavehave notnot beenbeen examinedexamined priorprior to to registrationregistration
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3232
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigationc)c) CostCost--friendlyfriendly patent patent litigationlitigation in in
GermanyGermany•• Special Special statutorystatutory remunerationremuneration
systemsystem forfor attorneysattorneys (BRAGO)(BRAGO)•• FeesFees fixedfixed in in relationrelation to to valuevalue of of
disputedispute•• FeesFees comparativelycomparatively moderatemoderate
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3333
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• Also: Also: StatutoryStatutory reimbursementreimbursement claimclaim
forfor winningwinning party in civil party in civil lawsuitslawsuits•• ReimbursementReimbursement limitedlimited to moderate to moderate
BRAGO BRAGO feesfees•• RiskRisk of of losinglosing a a lawsuitlawsuit cancan bebe
calculatedcalculated beforehandbeforehand•• OwnOwn attorneysattorneys‘‘ costscosts cancan bebe higherhigher
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3434
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• ExampleExample forfor comparativelycomparatively moderate moderate
feesfees: : -- A A greatgreat partpart of patent of patent casescases in in
DDüüsseldorf sseldorf areare filedfiled withwith a a valuevalue of of EUR 500,000.EUR 500,000.--
-- CostCost riskrisk involvinginvolving attorneysattorneys and and patent patent attorneysattorneys feesfees as well as as well as courtcourt feesfees: : approxapprox. EUR 35,000.. EUR 35,000.----
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3535
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• Remuneration Remuneration systemsystem advantageousadvantageous
eveneven forfor hugehuge companiescompanies withwithnecessitynecessity to plan to plan litigationlitigation budgetsbudgets
•• CostsCosts moderate moderate especiallyespecially in in comparisoncomparison to US and UK to US and UK litigationlitigation
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3636
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigationd)d) EducationEducation of Dof Düüsseldorf sseldorf judgesjudges in in
patent patent mattersmatters•• UniqueUnique trainingtraining of Dof Düüsseldorf sseldorf
judgesjudges•• Service in Service in thethe firstfirst instanceinstance•• Service on Service on thethe Patents Senate of Patents Senate of
Court of AppealCourt of Appeal•• ManyMany judgesjudges havehave servedserved in Federal in Federal
SupremeSupreme Court (Court (judicialjudicial clerksclerks))
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3737
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• ManyMany DDüüsseldorf sseldorf judgesjudges havinghaving
servedserved in in thethe Patent Patent ChamberChamber havehavebecomebecome Federal Federal SupremeSupreme Court Court judgesjudges and and areare still still servingserving todaytoday
•• ExceptionalExceptional trainingtraining „„withinwithin thethesystemsystem““ addsadds to to reliabilityreliability and and qualityquality of Dof Düüsseldorf sseldorf decisionsdecisions
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3838
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigatione)e) DDüüsseldorf sseldorf procedureprocedure –– SpeedSpeed•• All All judgesjudges subordinatesubordinate themselvesthemselves
to a to a selfself--imposedimposed rigidrigid time time scheduleschedule uniqueunique on on thethe European European patent patent litigationlitigation stagestage
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
3939
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• ApproxApprox. . sixsix weeksweeks afterafter filingfiling writtenwritten
complaintcomplaint oror serviceservice respectivelyrespectively: : First oral First oral hearinghearing
•• First First hearinghearing onlyonly a formal a formal oneone, no , no discussiondiscussion on on meritsmerits of of casecase
•• OnlyOnly thethe motionsmotions areare submittedsubmitted, a , a date date forfor extensive extensive hearinghearing isis fixedfixedand and deadlinesdeadlines of of threethree monthsmonths arearesetset
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4040
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• Extensive Extensive hearinghearing roughlyroughly 66--9 9
monthsmonths afterafter firstfirst hearinghearing•• First First InstanceInstance decisiondecision in Din Düüsseldorf sseldorf
patent patent infringementinfringement actionsactions afterafterapproxapprox. 9. 9--12 12 monthsmonths ((withoutwithoutexpertexpert‘‘ss appointmentappointment))
•• WrittenWritten preparationpreparation•• All All casescases internallyinternally debateddebated in in thethe
weekweek priorprior to extensive to extensive hearinghearing
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4141
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• „„VotumVotum““ isis preparedprepared formingforming thethe
preliminarypreliminary basisbasis forfor thethe decisiondecision•• Hearing Hearing servesserves to to identifyidentify thethe crucialcrucial
aspectsaspects on on whichwhich bothboth attorneysattorneys‘‘attentionattention shouldshould bebe focussedfocussed in in pleadingspleadings
•• MostlyMostly: : contestedcontested featuresfeatures of of thethepatent patent claimclaim
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4242
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• DecisionDecision grantedgranted approxapprox. . threethree
weeksweeks afterafter extensive oral extensive oral hearinghearing, , writtenwritten decisiondecision servedserved fourfour weeksweeksafterafter thatthat ((sevenseven weeksweeks afterafter oral oral hearinghearing))
•• MostlyMostly: : JudgmentsJudgments, , notnot ordersorders to to taketake evidenceevidence
•• ReluctanceReluctance in in thethe firstfirst instanceinstance to to hearhear expertexpert‘‘ss opinionopinion
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4343
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigation•• Court of Appeal in second Court of Appeal in second instanceinstance
notnot as as reluctantreluctant to to hearhear expertsexperts•• EitherEither plaintiffplaintiff securedsecured byby firstfirst
instanceinstance judgmentjudgment, , oror plaintiffplaintiffactuallyactually seeksseeks expertexpert‘‘ss opinionopinion afterafterlosinglosing thethe firstfirst instanceinstance
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4444
3. Main 3. Main FactorsFactors forfor high international high international regardregard of Dof Düüsseldorf patent sseldorf patent litigationlitigationf)f) WillingnessWillingness of Dof Düüsseldorf sseldorf judgesjudges to to helphelp
enforcingenforcing patentspatents•• WithinWithin legal legal boundariesboundaries of of statutestatute--
conformingconforming constructionconstruction of patent of patent claimsclaims•• EquivalenceEquivalence: : PerhapsPerhaps a a preparednesspreparedness to to
construeconstrue patent patent claimsclaims so as to so as to covercover as as muchmuch „„deviationsdeviations““ as as cancan possiblypossibly bebebroughtbrought in in accordanceaccordance withwith claimclaim
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4545
4. 4. PreliminaryPreliminary injunctionsinjunctions in patent in patent mattersmatters
PreliminaryPreliminary InjunctionInjunction isis sharpestsharpestswordsword of patent of patent ownerownerStill Still notnot numerousnumerous injunctionsinjunctions in in patent patent mattersmatters, , butbut recentlyrecently moremoreoftenoften grantedgranted
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4646
4. 4. PreliminaryPreliminary injunctionsinjunctions in patent in patent mattersmatters
Long Long standingstanding prepre--conditionsconditions thatthata)a) bothboth infringementinfringement and and validityvalidity
withoutwithout reasonablereasonable doubtdoubtb)b) technology technology notnot tootoo difficultdifficultc)c) InfringementInfringement mustmust bebe easilyeasily
establishedestablishedd)d) BalancingBalancing of of partiesparties‘‘ interestsinterests in in
favourfavour of of plaintiffplaintiff//applicantapplicant
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4747
4. 4. PreliminaryPreliminary injunctionsinjunctions in patent in patent mattersmatters
e)e) casecase mustmust bebe urgenturgent ((„„specialspecial interestinterest to to bebe grantedgranted an an injunctioninjunction““))
RecentRecent experienceexperience showsshows: In : In principleprincipleDDüüsseldorf sseldorf courtcourt grantsgrants injunctionsinjunctions ififinfringementinfringement and and validityvalidity of patent of patent cancanbebe establishedestablished, and , and urgencyurgency cancan bebeshownshownStandards Standards maybemaybe higherhigher ifif thethe valuevalue isishighhigh
KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der KRIEGER GENTZ MES & GRAF v. der GROEBENGROEBEN
4848
5. 5. OtherOther IntellectualIntellectual PropertyPropertyRightsRights
FourFour specialisedspecialised Chambers Chambers forfortrademarktrademark, , designdesign and unfair and unfair competitioncompetition casescasesJudgesJudges withwith yearsyears of of experienceexperience in in thesethese mattersmatters12th Civil 12th Civil ChamberChamber: : ExclusiveExclusivestatewidestatewide jurisdictionjurisdiction on on copyrightcopyrightinfringementinfringement mattersmatters
top related