Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce (CFI, 5 August 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 5 August 2024 (UPC_CFI_363/2023, App_41447/2024), the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division, on Seoul Viosys’s application under Rule 333.1 RoP, upheld the judge-rapporteur’s order of 1 July 2024, which had deferred the decision whether to admit a subsequent request to amend EP 3 926 698 under Rule 30.2 RoP in the infringement action against expert e-Commerce and expert klein, the latter having brought a counterclaim for revocation.

Question

May the judge-rapporteur defer the decision whether to admit a subsequent amendment request, and does the two-month reply period of Rule 32.1 RoP apply to such a request?

Decision

The judge-rapporteur’s measure is a procedural order open to review. Rule 30.2 RoP is a strict preclusion rule: a subsequent request is admissible only once admitted, and no decision rejecting it is required. As the rule does not say when the admission decision must be taken, timing lies within the court’s discretion and the decision may be deferred. The amendment has been neither admitted nor rejected, so admission remains possible. The two-month period of Rule 32.1 RoP is triggered only by an application to amend under Rule 30.1 RoP, not by a subsequent request, a reading consistent with the aim, in point 7 of the Preamble, of an oral hearing within about one year. The defendants’ right to be heard can be safeguarded within the admission decision.

Key points for practice

• Rule 30.2 RoP requires neither an immediate ruling on admission nor a fresh round of pleadings on the Rule 32 timetable.
• Practical point: a patentee filing late auxiliary requests should expect admission to be deferred and cannot rely on an automatic reply period for the other side.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Preamble (point 7), Rules 30.1, 30.2, 32.1 and 333.1

Case law cited

Panasonic v Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecomm, Mannheim Local Division, 27 June 2024, Carrier v BITZER Electronics, Court of Appeal, 28 May 2024

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.