Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 27 February 2024)
| Date | 27 February 2024 |
|---|---|
| Court | CFI |
| Division | Paris (FR) Local Division |
| Type of action | Generic Order |
| Case number(s) | UPC_CFI_440/2023 |
| Registry reference | ORD_10099/2024 · UPC_CFI_440/2023 |
| Parties | Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd v. Laser Components SAS |
Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry
Case timeline
- 12 February 2024 : LASER COMPONENTS v Seoul Viosys (CFI, 12 February 2024) App_588685/2023 · ORD_3311/2024 · UPC_CFI_440/2023
- 14 March 2024 : Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 14 March 2024) App_12803/2024 · ORD_13006/2024 · UPC_CFI_440/2023
Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.
Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026
Our analysis
Summary
By an order of 27 February 2024 (UPC_CFI_440/2023, ACT_588685/2023, ORD_10099/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division (C. Lignieres), after consulting the panel, declined to propose to the parties a change from French to English, the language in which EP 3 404 726 was granted, as requested by Laser Components SAS, defendant in the infringement action brought by Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. The order shows that a French defendant can hardly object to the claimant’s choice of French.
Question
Can a defendant established in France have the judge-rapporteur propose to the parties a change of the language of the proceedings to the language of grant under Rule 322 RoP?
Decision
Rule 322 allows the judge-rapporteur, on its own initiative or at a party’s request and after consulting the panel, to propose to the parties a change to the language of grant. Art. 49(4) UPCA makes use of that language subject to the parties’ agreement, on grounds of convenience and fairness. Although the patent was granted in English, the claimant chose French, which respects the rights of the defendant, a French company. Neither the nationality of the representative nor that of the third party invited to intervene amounts to a serious ground of convenience or fairness. The panel having given an unfavourable opinion, there was no reason to propose the change requested.
Key points for practice
- Practical point: a defendant sued in its own language will not easily obtain a switch to the language of grant, the nationality of its counsel or of an intervener is not a serious ground.
Provisions applied
- Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
- Art. 49(4)
- Rules of Procedure
- Rule 322
Related decisions
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.
Decisions in the same proceedings
Going further
Lexicon: Written procedure (UPC), Court fees and costs (UPC).
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
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.
Parties
- claimantSeoul Viosys Co., Ltd.28 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
- defendantLaser Components SAS6 decisions in the corpusFollow this party
Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals
- 12 February 2024 LASER COMPONENTS v Seoul Viosys (CFI, 12 February 2024) Generic application · UPC_CFI_440/2023
La juge rapporteure déclare recevable l'intervention forcée du fournisseur des produits litigieux, qui sera lié par la décision s'il ne dépose pas de mémoire dans le délai d'un mois.
- 27 February 2024 Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 27 February 2024) Generic Order · UPC_CFI_440/2023
- 14 March 2024 Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 14 March 2024) Generic application · UPC_CFI_440/2023
La demande de prorogation du délai de défense est rejetée et la défenderesse doit déposer son mémoire en défense au plus tard le 18 mars 2024.
- 15 October 2024 Photon Wave v Seoul Viosys (CoA, 15 October 2024) Appeal RoP220.2 · appeal, first-instance number cited in the decision
La cour d’appel déclare irrecevable l’appel de Photon Wave, la mention de la règle 220.2 en fin d’ordonnance ne valant pas autorisation d’appel.
What the record states
- Nature of the act
- Generic Order
- Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
- Il n'y a pas lieu de proposer aux parties le passage du français à l'anglais demandé par la défenderesse française.
- Appeal
- An appeal is documented in the corpus (see above).
- Instance
- First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.
Patents mentioned
EP 3 404 726mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent
Related decisions cited in the analyses
- Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 14 March 2024) cited in this record
- LASER COMPONENTS v Seoul Viosys (CFI, 12 February 2024) cited in this record
Patents and standards
| Publication | Role in the dispute | Family | Standard and declaration | Pool | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EP 3 404 726Ultraviolet light-emitting device recorded proprietor: Seoul Viosys Co Ltd | Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 8 other decision(s): Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 24 April 2025) · Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 17 February 2025) · Photon Wave v Seoul Viosys (CFI, 24 January 2025) · Photon Wave v Seoul Viosys (CoA, 15 October 2024) · Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 24 July 2024) · Seoul Viosys v Photon Wave (CFI, 6 May 2024) · Seoul Viosys v Laser Components (CFI, 14 March 2024) · LASER COMPONENTS v Seoul Viosys (CFI, 12 February 2024) | 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 |
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.