Our partner Michael Wegerer summarized some key takeaways of the first judgement of the UPC Central Division Munich Section delivered on July 16, 2024 concerning the patent EP 3 666 797 B1
Introduction
The judgment starts with the technical introduction and a summary of the background section of the patent, i.e. the prior art. Based thereon, the underlying problem of the patent is formulated. I.e. the underlying problem is not defined artificially based on a technical effect reached by a feature difference to a “closest prior art document”. The approach is rather a realistic approach and less an artificial approach: The skilled person endeavors to further develop the state of the art based on the existing state of the art. The technical problem is formulated rather broadly and generally. This is basically in line with the approach of the German Federal Court of Justice, cf. e.g. BGH X ZR 128/09 “Repaglinid” (2014) and contradictory to the problem-solution-approach performed by the European Patent Office (EPO).
