It is indeed possible for a patent owner to very quickly request the local division of the State where the trade show is taking place for the possibility of making a seizure on the booth of the alleged infringer.
In these cases, given the urgency of the matter and the risk of evidence disappearing, the judge ruled without hearing the alleged infringer. On the other hand, he generally ordered the payment of a security deposit.
Measures to preserve evidence are therefore a particularly interesting means of proving infringement, especially when the alleged infringer is domiciled outside the territory of the UPC.
On the other hand, they require anticipation and responsiveness from the patent owner, who must provide preliminary evidence of the validity of his title and of the infringement of at least some of the claims.
In the case Oerlikon Textile v. Bhagat Group, the evidence provided to the local division consisted of photographs and brochures obtained on the alleged infringer’s booth, and the order was issued on the last day of the same show.
Regimbeau’s UPC representatives are familiar with French “saisie-contrefaçon” measures and are ready to assist their clients in these new measures before the UPC.
