Book a demo
Monthac v. Reintech: Clean Room Patent Infringement | PatSnap
Explore in Eureka
Case ID1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577
FiledInvalid Date
ClosedOct 2024
Patent Litigation

Monthac v. Reintech: Clean Room Partition Patent Appeal Partially Granted

Monthac Montagens brought an infringement action against Reintech Indústria over utility model patent BRMU8903444Y1, covering specialised glass partition profiles for clean room construction. The Court of Justice of São Paulo partially granted Monthac’s appeal on 29 October 2024, suggesting the lower court’s ruling was revised in the patent holder’s favour on at least some claims.

Resolution time
0days
Case closed 29 October 2024 — filing date not available in public record
Patents asserted
1
BRMU8903444Y1 — special glass partition profile for clean room construction
Outcome
Appeal Granted In Part
Appeal partially granted — lower court decision revised on at least some grounds
Cost ruling
Not Recorded
Cost ruling not available in the public record for this case
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

São Paulo court revises clean room patent ruling on appeal

Monthac Montagens, Desenhos e Projetos Ltda – ME initiated an infringement action against Reintech Indústria de Equipamentos e Produtos para Controle da Contaminação Ltda. before the courts of São Paulo, Brazil (Case No. 1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577). The dispute centred on utility model patent BRMU8903444Y1, which covers a special profile system incorporating glass partitions used in the construction of clean rooms — controlled environments critical to pharmaceutical, semiconductor, and biomedical manufacturing.

On 29 October 2024, the Court of Justice of São Paulo issued a ruling that partially granted Monthac’s appeal, revising the prior determination on at least some of the contested issues. A partial grant at the appellate level typically signals that the lower court’s findings were upheld in some respects but corrected or overturned in others — though the specific scope of what was granted and what was denied is not fully disclosed in the available public record.

Because the filing date is not recorded in the available public data, the full duration of proceedings cannot be determined. The partial nature of the appellate outcome suggests the infringement and relief questions were contested on multiple fronts simultaneously. What specific remedies, if any, were awarded to Monthac as a result of the partial grant remains unclear without access to the full judicial decision.

Case at a glance
Case no.1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577
CourtCourt of Justice of Sao Paulo
JudgeN/A
FiledN/A
ClosedOctober 29, 2024
Duration0 days
OutcomeAppeal Granted In Part
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisAppeal Granted In Part
Prior Art Intelligence
See what prior art exists on this patent.
Eureka scans millions of patents and papers to surface prior art that may have invalidated these claims before costly litigation begins.
Check Prior Art
Case data sourced from Brazilian court docket / Court of Justice of Sao Paulo via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to Appeal Granted In Part in 0 days

Case closed 29 October 2024 — filing date not available in public record

Case timeline: Complaint filed , MID — 0 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in MONTHAC MONTAGENS, DESENHOS E PROJETOS LTDA – ME v REINTECH INDUSTRIA DE EQUIPAMENTOS AND PRODUTOS PARA CONTROLE DA CONTAMINAÇÃO LTDA. from filing to resolution. Source: Brazilian court docket, Court of Justice of Sao Paulo. Complaint filed Pre-trial proceedings OCT 29 2024 Appeal Granted In Part 0 DAYS TOTAL
Court ruling

Appeal partially granted: what the São Paulo ruling means for both parties

Legal mechanism

What ‘partially granted’ means at appellate level

A partial grant of appeal means the reviewing court found reversible error in the lower decision on at least one ground, while leaving other aspects of that decision intact. Neither party achieves a complete win. The appellate court reformulates the outcome in a way that splits the contested issues — typically affirming findings it considers correct and correcting those it does not. The specific scope of correction is determined by the operative part of the ruling.

Partial appellate correction
Patent holder outcome

Monthac secures partial appellate relief on clean room patent

A partially granted appeal is a qualified win for Monthac as the appellant. It suggests the Court of Justice of São Paulo agreed with Monthac on at least some of its arguments — whether relating to infringement findings, scope of the utility model, or remedies. However, because the grant is only partial, Monthac did not prevail on every argument it raised. The enforceability of BRMU8903444Y1 is not extinguished, and the partial revision may strengthen Monthac’s position in any subsequent enforcement steps.

Partial win for patent holder
Challenger outcome

Reintech faces revised liability on at least some issues

For Reintech, the partial grant means the lower court’s determination was not fully upheld in its favour. Reintech likely retained some protection on grounds where Monthac’s appeal was rejected, but faces a revised legal position on the issues where the appeal succeeded. Depending on the scope of what was granted, Reintech may face injunctive exposure, damages liability, or other relief ordered on remand. The absence of a full reversal, however, means Reintech is not without any successful arguments in this litigation.

Partial adverse outcome
Commercial implications

Clean room construction sector: IP enforcement precedent reinforced

This case signals that utility model rights in Brazil’s clean room and contamination control sector are actively enforced at appellate level. Competitors and integrators supplying glass partition profile systems for clean rooms should treat BRMU8903444Y1 as a live enforcement risk. A partial appellate win for the patent holder, even without full reversal, typically emboldens further enforcement action and may deter design-around strategies that do not clearly step outside the utility model’s protected scope.

Active enforcement risk
Legal analysis based on Brazilian court docket docket records for case 1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577 and PatSnap Eureka litigation intelligence Search PatSnap Eureka ↗
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffMONTHAC MONTAGENS, DESENHOS E PROJETOS LTDA – MEIndividualClean room construction and design firm — holder of BRMU8903444Y1Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantREINTECH INDUSTRIA DE EQUIPAMENTOS AND PRODUTOS PARA CONTROLE DA CONTAMINAÇÃO LTDA.IndividualManufacturer of equipment and products for contamination control in clean environmentsSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge N/AJudgeCourt of Justice of Sao PauloSearch in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Official order — verbatim text

“Having said that and considering everything else that appears in the records, by my vote, I PARTIALLY GRANT the appeal filed, in the terms mentioned above.”
Source: Brazilian court docket Docket, Case 1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577, Court of Justice of Sao Paulo

The appellate court’s ruling — ‘I PARTIALLY GRANT the appeal filed, in the terms mentioned above’ — is a split operative disposition. In Brazilian civil procedure, a partial grant at the Court of Justice level means the collegiate chamber found merit in some but not all of Monthac’s grounds of appeal, revising the first-instance judgment accordingly. The phrase ‘in the terms mentioned above’ incorporates the ratio from the body of the opinion, which is not reproduced in the available public record. For Reintech, this creates revised exposure on the granted issues while preserving any first-instance determinations the appellate court left undisturbed.

Brazilian court docket case 1030952-62.2020.8.26.0577 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗
Patent at issue

BRMU8903444Y1 — special glass partition profile for clean room construction

Publication No.BRMU8903444Y1
Patent details
ProductSpecial profile system with glass partitions for clean room construction
Cited in actionN/A

BRMU8903444Y1 is a Brazilian utility model registration — a form of industrial property protection under Brazilian IP Law (Law No. 9,279/1996) that protects the practical form or arrangement of an object that brings a functional improvement. This registration covers a special profile system incorporating glass partitions specifically designed for the construction of clean rooms. Clean rooms are tightly controlled environments used across pharmaceutical manufacturing, semiconductor fabrication, biotechnology, and medical device production, where particulate and microbial contamination must be rigorously managed.

The commercial significance of this utility model lies in the specificity of its application. Glass partition profile systems for clean rooms must satisfy stringent hygiene, sealing, and structural requirements that differ fundamentally from standard architectural glazing. A utility model protecting a particular profile configuration in this niche creates a meaningful barrier to imitation. For Reintech — a company whose core business is contamination control equipment — this patent sits squarely within its product development perimeter, which likely explains why the dispute escalated to appellate level.

Patent data sourced from USPTO via PatSnap Eureka patent database Search patent records in Eureka ↗
Freedom to operate

Should you run an FTO against BRMU8903444Y1?

Any company manufacturing, importing, or installing glass partition profile systems intended for clean room applications in Brazil should treat BRMU8903444Y1 as a live FTO concern. This case demonstrates that the patent holder is willing to litigate through to the appellate level and has achieved partial success in those proceedings. Contamination control equipment suppliers, clean room integrators, and construction product distributors active in the Brazilian market are the highest-risk categories.

PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows R&D and IP teams to map their clean room partition profile designs against the protected scope of BRMU8903444Y1 and related Brazilian utility models. Eureka’s claim analysis tools can surface design-around opportunities, identify relevant prior art, and flag related registrations from both Monthac and competing applicants — helping product teams make informed launch decisions before entering the Brazilian clean room construction market.

PatSnap Eureka FTO Search

Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on BRMU8903444Y1 to assess your product’s exposure

Run FTO in Eureka →
Related litigation

Similar clean room construction patent infringement cases in Brazil

Cases involving utility model infringement of construction and contamination control profiles before Brazilian state courts and the Court of Justice of São Paulo.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
MONTHAC MONTAGENS, DESENHOS E PROJETOS LTDA – ME patent enforcement history, Court of Justice of Sao Paulo case history, MONTHAC MONTAGENS, DESENHOS E PROJETOS LTDA – ME’s full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
Clean room IP disputes BRUtility model appeals TJSPGlass partition patent casesContamination control IP suits
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the clean room construction IP landscape

Utility model enforcement in Brazil’s clean room sector is viable at appellate level — this case confirms São Paulo courts will intervene.

Brazilian utility models in construction are actively enforced at appeal

Monthac’s partial appellate success demonstrates that Brazilian utility model patents covering specialised construction profiles are not merely defensive filings. Competitors in the clean room fit-out and contamination control supply chain should audit their product lines against BRMU8903444Y1 and similar rights before entering this market segment.

Partial grants signal multi-issue disputes — scope matters

The partial nature of this appellate outcome is consistent with disputes where both infringement and remedy questions are independently contested. For in-house IP teams, this underscores the importance of addressing each claim element and each head of relief separately in Brazilian infringement proceedings rather than relying on a single dispositive argument.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Unlock gated analysis on clean room utility model enforcement strategy at the São Paulo appellate court level.
Design-around risk analysisSão Paulo IP appeal strategyUtility model scope signals
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

ME v REINTECH — key questions answered

Still have questions? PatSnap Eureka can answer them instantly from patent and litigation data. Ask Eureka ↗
PatSnap Eureka

Track clean room IP enforcement before your next Brazil launch

PatSnap Eureka monitors litigation activity and utility model enforcement for construction and contamination control IP in Brazil. Run an FTO against BRMU8903444Y1 and surface related enforcement signals before committing to market.

Ask anything about this case.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.
Powered by PatSnap Eureka
Link copied to clipboard

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.