Irides: Weekly patent litigation update

The Irides Weekly Update is our round-up of patent litigation news highlights from around the world. Taking its name from the plural of “iris” - a nod to the ability of Irides to see what’s happening around the world.

Our latest edition - 27 September 2024 - is below:

UPC

Nordic-Baltic Regional Division and Paris Central Division reject requests for access to documents in Edwards v Meril.

On 18 September 2024, the UPC’s Nordic-Baltic Regional Division rejected an application made on behalf of Erik Krahbichler for access to written pleadings and evidence in the Edwards v Meril proceedings (UPC_CFI_8/2023). Mr Krahbichler requested access to all pleadings and evidence as a member of the public, in particular being a board member and investor in a medical device company within the field of cardiac implant technology, SWAT Medical. He submitted he had a direct interest and concern as a competitor regarding the validity of the patent in dispute with regard to a third-party product under development potentially similar to the allegedly infringing products of the defendants. Both the Claimants and Defendant objected to the documents being provided.

The Nordic-Baltic Regional Division held that r. 262 RoP, Art. 45 and Art. 52 UPCA have to be interpreted widely in light of the general principle of openness under EU law. The Regional Division acknowledged that the public generally has an interest in written submissions and evidence being made available, but that this needs to be balanced against the interests of the parties or other affected parties or the general interest of justice or public order.

In this instance, the Regional Division considered that the description of the allegedly infringing patent is already in the public domain and must be sufficiently precise to enable third parties to consider whether said patent is infringed. Therefore the pleadings and the evidence would not assist Mr Krahbichler in this respect. Further, the Regional Division considered that the specific medical field that Mr Krahbichler operates in was not very relevant as the company may change its lines of activity over time. In contrast, the Regional Division held that civil litigation in essence was a private dispute and the integrity of the proceedings was best ensured by allowing the parties to make their arguments, and the Court to consider them, without unnecessary interference from third parties. The Regional Division noted that such an interest in the integrity of the proceedings will usually last until the end of the proceedings where the balance of interests may change. The Regional Division therefore rejected the application at this point in time. However, leave to appeal the decision was granted as the Regional Division considered there to be a general interest in clarifying the correct interpretation of the law.

On 23 September 2024, the Paris Central Division reached a decision on a similar request for access to written evidence and pleadings in parallel proceedings between Meril v Edwards (UPC_CFI_189/2024), this time made jointly by Erik Krahbichler and SWAT Medical AB. Both the Claimants and Defendant again objected to the documents being provided. The Central Division held that the mere fact of operating in the same field as the patent in dispute is not sufficient to establish a specific interest in the case documents, nor was a general interest in investigating the matter. In line with the Nordic-Baltic Regional Division, the Central Division therefore found that the protection of the integrity of the ongoing proceedings meant that the access to documents should be refused.

CAMBODIA

Cambodia launches the trial phase of its Intellectual Property Rights Recordation System.

On 1 September 2024, the trial phase of an Intellectual Property Rights Recordation System was launched by the General Department of Customs and Excise of Cambodia’s Ministry of Economy and Finance. The system compiles information and documents related to IP rights in Cambodia and aims to allow customs authorities to access documents more easily in order to identify potential parallel imports and infringing goods at the border, potentially facilitating actions by Cambodia’s customs authorities. Intellectual property rights which may be recorded include trade marks, geographical indications, copyrights and related rights. Exclusive distribution rights may also be registered.