28 February 2024
Authored and Edited by Dr. Moritz Meckel
The UPC Court of Appeal rendered its first substantive decision [1] on 26 February 2024. In re. 10x Genomics vs. NanoString, it revoked a preliminary injunction issued by the UPC local division in Munich.
Although the Court commented on many legal questions of the new UPC framework, the ultimate reason for the decision was the Court’s preliminary conclusion that the underlying patent probably lacks an inventive step.
It found that the prior art document D6 [2] discloses all features of the method of analysis subject to patent claim 1 except for the limitation that the method is applied to analytes "in a cell or tissue sample". This application, according to the Court of Appeal, was obvious to the skilled person in view of document D6 [2] alone or in combination with B30 [3].
The finding is just in preliminary proceedings and shall not be confused with a revocation of the patent as such.
[1] Original decision (in German): https://www.unified-patent-court.org/sites/default/files/upc_documents/576355-2023-AnordnungDE.final_.pdf
English translation: https://www.unified-patent-court.org/sites/default/files/upc_documents/576355-2023%20AnordnungEN.final_.pdf
[2] Document D6 = Jenny Göransson et al., „A single molecule array for digital targeted molecular analyses“, Nucleic Acids Research, 2009, Vol. 37, No. 1, e7 - https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/37/1/e7/1026581
[3] Document B30 = Magnus Stougaard et al., „In situ detection of non-polyadenylated RNA molecules using Turtle Probes and target primed rolling circle PRINS“, BMC Biotechnology 2007, 7:69, http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6750/7/69
Copyright © 2024 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
At the PTAB Blog
IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026
May 26, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
May 20, 2026
Conference
19th Annual Forum on Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation in Europe
May 19-20, 2026
Amsterdam
Webinar
Changes at the PTAB from Settled Expectations to Real Parties in Interest to Director Involvement
May 18, 2026
Webinar
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.