Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 OCTOBER 2026

LD Duesseldorf, October 6, 2026, Decision, UPC_CFI_137/2025, UPC_CFI_512/2025

Bardehle Pagenberg
Bardehle Pagenberg
Contributor
Bardehle Pagenberg

Bardehle Pagenberg

IP practitioners with technical expertise As one of Europe’s leading IP law firms, BARDEHLE...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bardehle Pagenberg

Under Rule 171(2) RoP, a defendant is not required to provide counter-measurements if the claimant’s initial measurements regarding a claim feature are inherently unconvincing and inconclusive

GermanyIntellectual Property

1. Key takeaways

Under Rule 171(2) RoP, a defendant is not required to provide counter-measurements if the claimant’s initial measurements regarding a claim feature are inherently unconvincing and inconclusive

Where the claimant’s experimental data fails to isolate the alleged buffering effect from the geometry of multiple casing inlets, the proof remains inconclusive on its face. In such circumstances, the defendant’s general denial is sufficient, and no obligation arises under Rule 171(2) RoP to produce experimental counter-measurements.

Under Rule 13.1(i) RoP, the scope of an infringement action extends beyond the tested sample to all products embodying the asserted technical features

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from