Nipro wins dispute over dialyser patent with Taylor Wessing and Betten Resch

A long-running dispute between Fresenius Medical Care and Nipro over dialysis technology has concluded in Germany. The Federal Court of Justice declared the patent-in-suit invalid, thereby removing the basis for the infringement dispute.

Fresenius’ EP 1 671 695, which protects a “hollow fibre dialyser comprising curled hollow fibres”, expired in 2021. The current proceedings therefore mainly concerned the question of damages.

Mannheim Regional Court found the patent to be infringed in June 2020. Nipro then lodged an appeal, but the Higher Regional Court initially suspended the infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court had ruled on the patent’s validity.

Amended in opposition

In its nullity action, the Japanese medical technology manufacturer challenged the German part of the patent on the grounds of added matter. In opposition proceedings, the EPO upheld EP 695 in amended form in February 2021.

After the Federal Patent Court also upheld the German part of the patent in late 2022 (case ID: 3 Ni 11/21), Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court confirmed the first-instance Mannheim decision in March 2024 and declared the patent infringed (case ID: 6 U 111/20). An appeal against the denial of leave to appeal is currently pending before the Federal Court of Justice.

Simultaneously, an appeal against the Federal Patent Court’s validity ruling was pending. In its latest ruling, the Federal Court of Justice has now reached a different conclusion than the first instance and declared EP 695 invalid (case ID: X ZR 50/23). The grounds for the judgment are not yet available. The appeal against the denial of leave to appeal in the infringement proceedings is therefore moot.

Alongside the German proceedings, the parties are also in dispute in France and Belgium. The Judicial Court Paris revoked the French part of the patent in late 2024 due to lack of inventive step. An appeal is pending. In Belgium, the first instance court ruled that the patent was valid but not infringed. This case is now under appeal.