Skip to content

UPC – NanoString Technologies v. 10x Genomics and President and Fellows of Harvard College / rectification

11 Mar 2024

NanoString Technologies Inc et al. v. 10x Genomics, Inc. and President and Fellows of Harvard College, Order of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court, 11 March 2024, Case no. UPC_CoA_335/2023

Correction of ´obvious slip´ in the order of 26 February 2024

“With regard to an obvious slip in Headnote 2, paragraph 3 and in accordance with the reasons of the order of 26 February 2024, Headnote 2 of the order is rectified as follows after having heard the parties:

“2. The patent claim is not only the starting point, but the decisive basis for determining the protective scope of a European patent under Art. 69 EPC in conjunction with the Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69 EPC.

“The interpretation of a patent claim does not depend solely on the strict, literal meaning of the wording used. Rather, the description and the drawings must always be used as explanatory aids for the interpretation of the patent claim and not only to resolve any ambiguities in the patent claim.

“However, this does not mean that the patent claim merely serves as a guideline and that its subject-matter also extends to what, after examination of the description and drawings, appears to be the subject-matter for which the patent proprietor seeks protection.

“The patent claim is to be interpreted from the point of view of a person skilled in the art.

“In applying these principles, the aim is to combine adequate protection for the patent proprietor with sufficient legal certainty for third parties.

“These principles for the interpretation of a patent claim apply equally to the assessment of the infringement and the validity of a European patent.”

The order can be read here.