EPLAW PATENT BLOG

UPC – Sanofi-Aventis v. Amgen / Appeal

Posted: October 18th, 2023

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Groupe S.A., Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A. and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v. Amgen Inc, Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court, appeal against dismissal of a procedural order, 13 October 2023, Case no. UPC_CoA_320/2023

Service of the Statement of claim without annexes referred to or announces therein; term extension

KEYNOTES:
1. Under Rule 271 RoP, a Statement of claim, even if it refers to or announces the later submission of Annexes, can be validly served on a defendant, provided that the Statement of claim without the Annexes enables the defendant to assert its rights in legal proceedings
before the courts of the UPC. A Statement of claim must therefore at least state with certainty the subject matter and cause of action.

2. Given the purpose of Rule 13.2 RoP as set out above, if a claimant did not upload the Annexes simultaneously with the Statement of claim in the CMS, and thus did not comply with Rule 13.2, and as a consequence these have not been available when the representative of the defendant accessed the CMS with the Access Code contained in the Notice, this in itself is sufficient to constitute a reasoned request by a defendant for an extension of the terms mentioned in Rules 19.1 and 23 RoP for lodging a Preliminary objection and the Statement of defense, regardless of the nature and/or content of the Annexes.

3. Failing any specific circumstances of an individual case which calls for another term, which have to be brought forward by the claimant, the extension of the terms mentioned in Rules 19.1 and 23 shall compensate for and thus be equal to the period during which the Annexes
have not been available after service of the Statement of claim contrary to Rule 13.2 RoP.

A copy of the order can be read here.

Leave a Reply