Emporia UK and Ireland Ltd. v. Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd., - 65-16, Sandan-ro 163 beongil, Danwongu, Ansansi

Central Division

Paris Seat

of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court

Central division (Paris seat)

issued on 30 March 2026

in the revocation proceedings

UPC_CFI_258/2025

HEADNOTES: 1. The revocation of an independent claim does not automatically affect the validity of

unchallenged dependent claims, as the latter may possess autonomous patentability due to

additional technical features.

2. Following the revocation of an independent claim, the patent proprietor may amend the patent

to recast surviving dependent claims into independent form, provided the resulting configuration

complies with the requirements of clarity and unity of invention.

3. As a general rule, the mere deletion of claims does not necessitate a consolidated document.

4. A subsequent request to amend the patent under Rule 30 (2) ‘RoP’ is not justified by a need to

‘react’ to a Court of Appeal decision in parallel proceedings if there is no direct logical nexus between

the new procedural development therein and the proposed amendments or where the findings of

that decision were based on arguments already pleaded and were thus foreseeable.

KEYWORDS: revocation; added subject-matter; application to amend the patent.

CLAIMANT:

Emporia UK and Ireland Ltd.

- Park Road, Cardinal Point, Rickmansworth, WD3 1 RE

Hertfordshire United Kingdom

represented by Bernhard Ganahl (HGF Europe LLP) and Dirk Jestaedt (Krieger Mes PartG mbB)

DEFENDANT:

Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.

- 65-16, Sandan-ro 163 beongil, Danwongu, Ansansi,

Gyeonggido, 15429 Republic of Korea

represented by Olaf Isfort (Schneiders & Behrendt PartmbB, Rechts- und Patentanwälte) and Bolko

Ehlgen, Julia Schönbohm and Cordt-Magnus van Geuns-Rosch (Linklaters LLP)

PATENT AT ISSUE:

European patent n° EP 3 926 698 B1

PANEL:

Panel 2:

Presiding judge and judge-rapporteur

Paolo Catallozzi

Legally qualified judge

Tatyana Zhilova

Technically qualified judge

Alessandra Sani

DECIDING JUDGE:

This decision has been issued by the panel.

OF FACTS:

1. On 24 March 2024 Emporia UK and Ireland Ltd. filed a revocation action against Seoul Viosys

Co., Ltd. before this Central Division, registered as No. UPC_CFI_258/2024, requesting that the

Court declares EP 3 926 698 B1 (‘EP 698’) invalid with effect in the territory of Austria, Belgium,

Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden to the extent of claims 1 to

11.

2. The patent at issue was filed on 14 September 2012, as a second-generation divisional

application originating from EP 3 323 320 A1, which in turn originated as divisional application

of EP 2 757 598 A2. The underlying application was originally filed as PCT application KR

2012/007358, published as WO 2013/039344 A2). The patent claims priority from the KR

20110093396 of 16 September 2011, KR 20120015758 of 16 February 2012 and KR

20120052722 of 17 May 2012. The date of publication of the mention of the grant of the patent

is 4 January 2023.

3. The patent relates to a light-emitting diode and comprises 14 claims, including one independent

claim and 13 dependent claims.

4. Its independent claim 1 reads as follows:

“A light emitting diode comprising:

a light emitting structure formed on a substrate (100) and comprising a first conductivity

type semiconductor layer (110), an active layer (120) and a second conductivity type

semiconductor layer (130);

mesa-etched areas (150) formed from the surface of the second conductivity type

semiconductor layer (130) to the first conductivity type semiconductor layer (110);

a reflective electrode (140) formed on the second conductivity type semiconductor layer

(130) and including a reflective metal layer (142), a barrier metal layer (144) and a stress

relieving layer (143) formed between the reflective metal layer (142) and the barrier

metal layer (144), wherein the stress relieving layer (143) has a coefficient of thermal

expansion between