GEISTWERT Rechtsanwälte Lawyers Avvocati

UPC-CFI-0000029/2026

2seventy bio, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Biotech, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., Janssen-Cilag International NV, Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Janssen-Cilag NV, Janssen Biologics B.V., Janssen-Cilag B.V., Janssen-Cilag GmbH, Janssen-Cilag, Janssen-Cilag SpA, Janssen-Cilag A/S, Janssen-Cilag Aktiebolag, Janssen-Cilag Farmaceutica Lda., Legend Biotech Corporation, Legend Biotech USA Inc., Legend Biotech Ireland Limited, Legend Biotech Belgium BV

Datum
2026-09-23
Kammer
Brussels (BE) Local Division
Verfahrensart
Infringement
Sprache
EN

Metadaten

Fall-IDUPC-CFI-0000029-2026-ee008246ade7
AktenzeichenUPC-CFI-0000029/2026
RegisterzeichenUPC-CFI-0000029/2026
Entscheidungsreferenz
Schlagwörter
Leitsätze

Dokumente und Volltext

Textextraktion: pypdf | Seiten: 25

Brussels - Local Division UPC_CFI_029/2026 UPC_CFI_1934/2026 UPC_CFI_1940/2026 Order In Application of R.190 RoP - R. 305 RoP - R. 315 RoP of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Issued on 23 September 2026 Concerning EP 3 689 383 HEADNOTES 1. The RoP do not allow “aggressive interventions” or “principal interventions” (i.e. interventions whereby the intervener directs claims against one or more of the other parties different to one it supports). 2. A party can be held intervener in the infringement action (and be “treated as a party ”) and defendant in the counterclaim for revocation. The introduction of a counterclaim for revocation will reclassify the status of intervener (patent holder) to defendant, but will not imply the reclassification of the status of this inter ...