10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CoA, 5 July 2024)
| Date | 5 July 2024 |
|---|---|
| Court | CoA |
| Division | Luxembourg (LU) |
| Type of action | Generic application |
| Registry reference | App_38102/2024 · ORD_38556/2024 |
| Parties | 10x Genomics, Inc. |
Summary pending review. Official UPC registry metadata imported on 24 September 2026.
Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry
Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.
English summary awaiting review. Read the French case note.
Source and translations
- Official source
- Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
- Original language
- not recorded
- Translation available
- no translation recorded the firm’s French record is a summary, not a translation
- Date checked
- not recorded
Only the official text is authoritative. A machine translation is never presented as official, republishing a third-party document requires a verified basis in rights, and a link to the source is preferred.
Follow this case
Proceedings, related decisions, appeals, parties and patents as recorded in the registry and in the Dhenne Avocats corpus. Each link states its source.
Proceedings
No case number recorded in this record.
Parties
- claimant10x Genomics, Inc.57 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
Exact name as it appears in the record, group affiliation only where sourced and dated.
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
No other decision in the corpus bears the same case number, and no appeal is documented in the corpus to date.
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Generic application
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- La cour d'appel autorise le désistement de l'appel de 10x Genomics, déclare la procédure close et met les frais d'appel de Curio à la charge de 10x, leur montant étant fixé par la première instance.
- Appeal
- Decision of the Court of Appeal.
- Instance
- Court of Appeal decision.
Patents mentioned
EP 2 697 391mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent
Related decisions cited in the analyses
- Curio Bioscience v 10x Genomics (CoA, 17 April 2024) cited in this record
- Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CoA, 11 August 2026) cites this decision
- SANOFI-AVENTIS DEUTSCHLAND v AMGEN (CoA, 25 March 2026) cites this decision
- Juul Labs International v NJOY Netherlands (CoA, UPC_CoA_5/2025, 9 January 2026) cites this decision
- Juul Labs International v NJOY Netherlands (CoA, UPC_CoA_237/2025, 9 January 2026) cites this decision
- Juul Labs International v NJOY Netherlands (CoA, UPC_CoA_328/2025, 9 January 2026) cites this decision
- 10x Genomics v Vizgen (CoA, 5 March 2025) cites this decision
- Aarke v Sodastream Industries (CoA, 19 February 2025) cites this decision
- Beko Germany v Dolby International (CoA, UPC_CoA_77/2026, 9 October 2026) cites this decision
Scope: Dhenne Avocats corpus. Registry-based links are marked “official number”; links derived from the analyses are marked as such. An erroneous link can be withdrawn without deleting any record.
Patents and standards
| Publication | Role in the dispute | Family | Standard and declaration | Pool | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EP 2 697 391Method and product for localised or spatial detection of nucleic acid in a tissue sample recorded proprietor: Spatial Transcriptomics AB | Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 28 other decision(s): 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, ORD_598272/2023, 30 April 2024) · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, UPC_CFI_658/2025, 2 February 202 · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, UPC_CFI_657/2025, 2 February 202 · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, 5 August 2025) · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, 4 August 2025) · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, 16 June 2025) · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, 4 June 2025) · 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience (CFI, 2 May 2025) | not recorded | not recorded | not recorded | Espacenet · European Patent Register existence and title of the publication checked on 30 October 2026 (Google Patents, Espacenet and Register links are not checked automatically) mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis |
The statuses “asserted in litigation”, “declared essential”, “listed by a pool” and “essentiality examined by a court” are distinct and may coexist. Validity, infringement and technical essentiality are different questions. Scope: patents cited in the decisions of the Dhenne Avocats corpus, with no essentiality score or prediction.
Receive an alert
Weekly summary of new records and substantive updates matching what you follow. Address confirmed by email, unsubscribe at any time, one email per week even where several of your follows match.