Düsseldorf Local Division
UPC_CFI_758/2024
UPC_CFI_259/2025

Procedural Order
of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court
issued on 26 August 2025
concerning EP 2 352 431 B1

Claimant:
Hologic, Inc., represented by its President & CEO Stephen MacMillan, 250 Campus Drive, Marlbor-ough, MA 01752, United States of America,
Represented by: Attorney-at-law Dr Thure Schubert, Attorney-at-law Christian-Leopold Zapp, Attorney-at-law Arnold Asmussen, Attorney-at-law Dr Christoph Eisenmann, Vossius & Partner Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte mbB, Siebertstraße 3, 81675 Munich, Germany
Electronic address for service: vb-hologic-siemens@vossiusbrinkhof.eu

Defendants:
1. Siemens Healthineers AG, Siemensstr. 3, 91301 Forchheim, Germany
2. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Henkestr. 127, 91052 Erlangen, Germany
3. Siemens Healthineers Nederland B.V., Prinses Beatrixlaan 800, 2595 BN Den Haag, The Netherlands
4. Siemens Healthcare SAS, 6 rue du Général Audran, 92400 Courbevoie, France
All Defendants represented by: Attorney-at-law Dr Matthias Meyer, Attorney-at-law Dr Daniel Misch, Patent Attorney Dr Felix Harbsmeier, Patent Attorney Cameron Walker, Bird & Bird LLP, Carl-Theodor-Straße 6, 40213 Düsseldorf, Germany
Electronic address for service: matthias.meyer@twobirds.com

PATENT IN SUIT:
EUROPEAN PATENT NO. 2 352 431 B1

PANEL/DIVISION:
Panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division

DECIDING JUDGES:
This order was issued by Presiding Judge Thomas on behalf of Judge Dr Thom acting as judge-rap-porteur.

LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: English

SUBJECT: R. 262A RoP – Protection of confidential information

GROUNDS FOR THE ORDER:
1. Art. 9 (1) and (2) (a) of Directive (EU) 2016/943 provide that, in judicial proceedings, access
to documents submitted by the parties or third parties containing trade secrets or alleged
trade secrets may, upon request, be restricted in whole or in part to a limited number of
persons. The protection of confidential information is provided for in Art. 58 UPCA and im-
plemented in R. 262A RoP.
2. According to R. 262A.5 RoP, the Court may allow the application for protection of confidential information considering in particular whether the grounds relied upon by the applicant
for the order significantly outweigh the interest of the other party to have full access to the
information and the evidence in question.
3. That being said, the application is to be granted.
4. The formal requirements of R. 262A.2 and .3 RoP were complied with. The Claimant’s representatives were also heard before the confidentiality order was issued, as required by R. 262A.4 RoP. They made use of the opportunity to submit observations.
5. The Claimant has not challenged that the information in question is confidential. Nor did the
Claimant object to the scope of the requested order.

ORDER:
I. The following information is classified as confidential within the meaning of Art. 58 UPCA, R. 262.2 RoP:
- the information regarding the design, components and the functioning of the at-
tacked embodiments as well as Exhibit B&B 20, Exhibit B&B 21 and Exhibit B&B 22
and
- the content of […] according to Exhibit B&B 23 as well as Exhibit B&B 23 itself.
For ease of reference, information classified as confidential is highlighted in grey in the
Rejoinder and listed in the table below.
[…]
3
II. Information classified as confidential in paragraph I. shall be treated as such by anyone
who gains knowledge of it, whether as a party, their legal representative, witness, ex-
pert or other representative, or in any other capacity, as a result of their involvement
in the present proceedings and may not be used or disclosed outside these proceedings unless it has been acquired by them outside these proceedings.
Any individual who gains access to or knowledge of said information as a result of their
involvement in the present proceedings may not use or disclose it outside of these
proceedings, unless such information was acquired outside of these proceedings.
These obligations shall continue to apply even after the conclusion of these proceedings. This shall not apply if the court has denied the existence of the disputed trade
secret by a final judgment or as soon as the disputed information becomes known or
readily accessible to persons in the circles that usually deal with such information.
III. In the event of a culpable breach of this order, the Court may impose a penalty payment for each breach, to be determined having regard to the circumstances of each
case.
IV. The access restrictions contained in paragraph I. of the orders issued on 28 July 2025
and 1 August 2025, which restrict access to Defendant’s Rejoinder to the Reply to the
Statement of Defence/Reply to the Defence to the counterclaim for revocation/De-
fence to the Application to amend the patent of 25 July 2025 as well as Exhibits
B&B 19, B&B 20, B&B 21, B&B 22 and B&B 23 is restricted, on the part of the Claimant,
to Claimant’s legal representatives only, are hereby lifted.

DETAILS OF THE ORDER:
App_33733/2025, App_33736/25 and App_33737/2025 under main file reference ACT_63758/2024, CC_14403/2025
UPC number: UPC_CFI_758/2024 and UPC_CFI_259/2025
Type of procedure: Infringement action and Counterclaim for revocation

Issued in Düsseldorf on 26 August 2025