Vibration Damper Patent Dispute: São Paulo Court Dismisses Injunction
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
Learn from this case
Understand the legal analysis, timeline, and key takeaways
RecommendedCheck my product’s risk
Run FTO analysis for your own technology or product
Explore patent landscape
View related patents and competitive intelligence
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | ÊNIO BIANCHI ME v. NURNBERG-MESSE BRASIL FEIRAS E CONGRESSOS |
| Case Number | 1125978-34.2018.8.26.0100 |
| Court | Court of Justice of São Paulo, Brazil |
| Duration | 2018 – Mar 2024 6 years |
| Outcome | Plaintiff Injunction Dismissed |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | Trade fair operations (fairs organized from 2018 onward) |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
A Brazilian micro-enterprise (ME) asserting rights over a registered utility model patent covering a vibration damper arrangement device.
🛡️ Defendant
Brazilian subsidiary of NürnbergMesse, a global trade fair organizer, accused of infringing a utility model patent through its event operations.
The Patent at Issue
This closely watched case involved Brazilian utility model patent **BRMU8400847Y1**, which covers a mechanical arrangement designed to dampen vibration within a gap-opening device. Brazilian utility model patents (Modelo de Utilidade) protect functional improvements to existing objects or tools and typically have a shorter examination cycle than invention patents. Patent **BRMU8400847Y1** covers a mechanical arrangement designed to dampen vibration within a gap-opening device — a component type relevant to exhibition booth structures, industrial machinery, or related assembly systems.
- • BRMU8400847Y1 — Arrangement for a vibration damper for a device for opening gaps
Developing a new mechanical component?
Check if your design might infringe Brazilian utility models or related patents before launch.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The Court of Justice of São Paulo **dismissed the plaintiff’s injunction** on appeal. The court further declared the prior lower court ruling **null and void ex officio** due to the *citra petita* defect. Appellate fees were set at **R$ 2,000.00** pursuant to Article 85, §11 of the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). No damages award was disclosed in the available case record.
Key Legal Issues
The court’s most consequential procedural act was the sua sponte nullification of the prior judgment. A *citra petita* defect occurs when a court fails to rule on all relief requested by the plaintiff — here, the failure to address the injunction’s applicability to fairs beyond 2018. Rather than remanding, the appellate panel exercised jurisdiction to resolve the matter directly, determining the case was “ripe for judgment.” This reflects Brazil’s CPC provisions permitting appellate courts to substitute judgment when the factual and legal record is sufficiently developed.
Despite curing the procedural defect by expanding its scope of review, the court ultimately **denied injunctive relief**. While the specific substantive reasoning — whether rooted in non-infringement findings, patent validity challenges, or failure to meet injunction prerequisites under Brazilian law — is not fully detailed in the available record, the dismissal of the injunction suggests the plaintiff did not satisfy the applicable burden of proof for emergency or permanent relief.
Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in mechanical component design. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View 30+ related utility model patents in mechanical engineering
- See which companies are most active in similar components
- Understand claim interpretation trends for BRMU patents
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
Generic vibration damper designs
30+ Related Patents
In mechanical component space
Design-Around Options
Available for many utility models
✅ Key Takeaways
Brazilian appellate courts may nullify *citra petita* judgments ex officio and immediately render judgment on the merits.
Search related case law →Injunctive relief in Brazilian patent actions requires clear, evidence-supported infringement tied to specific acts.
Explore precedents →Frequently Asked Questions
The case involved Brazilian utility model patent BRMU8400847Y1, covering an arrangement for a vibration damper for a device for opening gaps.
The lower court issued a *citra petita* ruling — it failed to address the full scope of the plaintiff’s injunction request, particularly its applicability to all fairs beyond 2018. The appellate court nullified it ex officio.
The case signals that Brazilian courts will rigorously evaluate injunction requests in utility model enforcement actions and will correct procedural deficiencies without automatically favoring the plaintiff.
Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join 18,000+ IP professionals using PatSnap Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyse competitive landscapes with AI-powered precision.
References
- Court of Justice of São Paulo — Case 1125978-34.2018.8.26.0100
- Brazilian National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) — Patent Database
- BRMU8400847Y1 on Espacenet
- Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) Article 85 Commentary
- PatSnap — IP Intelligence Solutions for Law Firms
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. All case information is drawn from publicly available court records. For platform capabilities, visit PatSnap.