On May 8, the Düsseldorf LD heard the case of Grundfos v. Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump Co. . The court ruled in favor of Grundfos's request for an injunction and rejected the defendant's counterclaim for revocation. The summary of the judgment pointed out that the requirement for early assertion of lack of creativity applies not only to the newly proposed prior art documents for this purpose, but also to the situation where the existing documents in the case are attempted to be used to assert lack of creativity during the defense stage.

     Anything that can be asserted at an early stage should be asserted as early as possible, which is the impact of the pre-procedure of the young judicial institution of the UPC. Not long ago, in the case of Afga v. Gucci heard by the UPC Hamburg Regional Chamber, the court also clearly stated this principle: unless there is a legitimate reason to raise an invalidity defense at a later stage, the requirement to raise invalidity reasons at an early stage applies to both the submission of prior art documents and the construction of a “lack of creativity” claim on this basis.

     The Düsseldorf LD said that the defendant had not provided any reasons for the need to provide security, so the injunction can be enforced immediately without security. The injunction includes product recall and destruction of infringing goods. However, the defendant may apply to the Court of Appeal for a suspension.