Order

1. Questions of fact and law that are relevant both for the jurisdiction of the UPCA in demarcation to the national courts of the UPCA member states and for the merits of the case are in principal not to be decided in the preliminary objection procedure, but must be reserved for the main proceedings. 2. Accordingly, the alleged lack of claimant’s material ownership of the patent-in-suit, which, if true, would both render the infringement action meritless and invalidate a withdrawal of an opt-out, is not a proper subject-matter for a preliminary objection.

Art. 83 UPCA, alleged invalidity of the withdrawal of an opt-out due to lack of ownership of the patent-in-suit, R. 19 RoP