Occlutech v Lepu Medical (Europa) (CFI, 20 August 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 20 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_630/2025, ORD_34687/2025), the Düsseldorf Local Division (judge-rapporteur Kupecz), seised by Occlutech of an application for provisional measures against Lepu Medical (Europa) and Lepu Medical Technology (Peking) based on EP 1 998 686, decided to add a technically qualified judge to the panel at the provisional measures stage and asked the President of the Court of First Instance to assign one. The order confirms that a serious challenge to validity warrants the support of a technical judge even in provisional proceedings.

Question

May a panel hearing an application for provisional measures add a technically qualified judge, although the Rules of Procedure provide for one only in the main action?

Decision

Yes. Provisional measures are in principle granted only if the validity of the patent is sufficiently certain, which requires an assessment of whether it is more likely than not that the patent is invalid (Art. 62(4) UPCA and Rule 211.2). Although the Rules of Procedure mention technically qualified judges only for the main proceedings, the second sentence of Art. 8(5) UPCA allows the panel to add one of its own motion, after hearing the parties. The defendants’ challenge to validity justified this, and early involvement allows the judge to assist the judge-rapporteur at any time. As the parties raised no objection, the President was asked under Art. 18(3) UPCA to allocate a judge with experience in the technical field of the patent (IPC class A61B).

Key points for practice

• A defendant to provisional measures that seriously challenges validity should expect a technically qualified judge to take part in the assessment from the outset.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Arts 8(5), 18(3) and 62(4)

Rules of Procedure

Rules 34 and 211.2

Case law cited

10x Genomics, Court of Appeal, 26 February 2024 (UPC_CoA_335/2023), Mammut Sports Group v Ortovox Sportartikel, Court of Appeal, 25 September 2024 (UPC_CoA_182/2024), 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience, Düsseldorf Local Division, 29 January 2024, Magna PT v Valeo Electrification, Düsseldorf Local Division, 31 October 2024, Shanghai International v Aesculap, Düsseldorf Local Division, 1 May 2025, Aesculap v Shanghai International, Düsseldorf Local Division, 10 July 2025

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.