Align Technology has secured a major patent victory against Angelalign Technology in the Paris local division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), banning the Chinese manufacturer from selling certain orthodontic clear aligners in UPC territory. The October 19, 2026 ruling confirmed that Angelalign’s Angel Aligner Select and Pro systems violate EP 2 237 738, a patent covering orthodontic appliances featuring a ridge-shaped protrusion designed for controlled tooth movement.
The patent, owned by Align—developer of the Invisalign system—faced challenges from Angelalign on grounds of added matter, insufficient technical disclosure, and lack of inventive step. The Paris panel rejected all validity objections, determining that the patent claims remained valid and that Angelalign’s Torque Ridge feature directly infringed claims 1, 4, 5, 7, and 8. A key dispute centered on the interpretation of “buccal side of the cavity” in the patent.
Angelalign argued the term applied only to posterior teeth cavities, while Align maintained it covered all outer cavity surfaces. The court sided with Align, ruling that a skilled person in the field would interpret “buccal” as equivalent to “facial”, meaning the claims applied to both anterior and posterior teeth. This interpretation proved decisive, as Angelalign’s Torque Ridge is applied to anterior teeth.
Related Post: Netherlands lawyer wins major patent case for Halozyme
UK Claims Collapse Over Evidence Gaps
The judges rejected Angelalign’s added matter attacks concerning the terms “single” and “continuous” in relation to the ridge-shaped protrusion. They concluded that prior art would not have led a skilled practitioner to the claimed solution without hindsight, rejecting objections to inventive step. However, the ruling did not extend to the UK. The court dismissed Align’s infringement claims against three Angelalign entities for actions committed there, citing insufficient evidence of applicable UK law in the initial filing. Later submissions were deemed untimely and insufficient, as they relied on UPC procedural rules rather than national legal standards.
The panel also declined to hold Europe Angelalign Technology B.V., the Dutch holding company, liable for infringement. The decision aligned with a February 2026 ruling by the Düsseldorf local division, which similarly absolved the entity in a parallel case. Align nevertheless secured an injunction requiring Angelalign to recall and destroy infringing products in the 17 UPC-covered countries.
The panel ordered an injunction in 17 UPC countries, including recall and destruction of infringing products, with penalty payments of up to €10,000 per infringing product or €20,000 per day of continuous infringement. Damages run from the grant of the patent on 12 July 2023. Align’s requests for publicizing the decision or requiring security for enforcement were denied, limiting disclosure to a confidential group of four Align representatives plus an independent auditor.
UPC’s Mixed Rulings on Align’s Patents
This Paris decision follows a series of UPC rulings between the companies. In February 2026, the Düsseldorf local division granted Align a preliminary injunction over EP 4 346 690, which covers software for real-time orthodontic treatment plan modifications—the first such injunction issued by the UPC for a European patent with unitary effect. The Court of Appeal later upheld that decision, confirming infringement by Angelalign’s iOrtho software and its “Live Now” feature.
Related Post: Murata wins patent case against Maxscend
However, in May 2026, the Düsseldorf division dismissed a separate preliminary injunction application by Align concerning EP 4 295 806, which relates to clear aligner designs for tooth movement in extraction cases. The court found Align had not sufficiently proven infringement. An ongoing infringement action on the merits over EP 690, alongside a counterclaim for revocation, remains pending in Düsseldorf.
Legal representation in the Paris case included UK firm Carpmaels & Ransford, led by patent attorney John Brunner, for Align, and Düsseldorf-based IP boutique Arnold Ruess, with partner Arno Risse leading Angelalign’s defense. The ruling strengthens Align’s position in Europe but leaves the dispute unresolved in the UK and other jurisdictions. The case reflects broader industry tensions, where patent enforcement has become essential for market dominance. While the UPC aims to resolve disputes efficiently, national law variations, such as the dismissal of UK claims here, can still complicate enforcement.
Torque Ridge Found to Infringe Patent
The decision clarifies the scope of the Torque Ridge feature in Angelalign’s systems, which the court found to infringe Align’s claims. The Torque Ridge, a core component of Angelalign’s AngelAttach system, was determined to share the same functional and structural characteristics as the patented ridge-shaped protrusion described in EP 2 237 738. The panel emphasized that the ridge’s placement on the buccal (facial) side of the aligner cavity-rather than solely on posterior teeth-met the patent’s requirements.
