Ausgangs-Basisraten

Keine Sachentscheidungen im aktuellen Umfang.

• Einstweilige Maßnahmen107

• Dusseldorf LD29 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 75%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Munich LD26 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 60%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Hamburg LD16 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 60%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• The Hague LD13 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 50%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Milan LD7 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 83%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Mannheim LD4 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: —Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Lisbon LD3 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 0%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Paris LD3 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: 0%Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Nordic-Baltic RD1 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: —Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Brussels LD1 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: —Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Copenhagen LD1 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: —Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —
• Milan CD1 fällePI-Erteilungsquote: —Verletzungsquote: —Nichtigerklärungsquote: —

• —UPC_CFI_59/2025Nur KostenThe Munich Local Division ruled that the anti-anti-suit injunction application by Dolby International against Roku became moot after Roku voluntarily withdrew its US proceedings, declaring the application for provisional measures groundless and the earlier interim order void, with costs awarded against Roku.
• —UPC_CFI_755/2024PI erteiltThe Munich Local Division granted Avago Technologies an anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction preventing Realtek Semiconductor from pursuing an anti-enforcement injunction in US proceedings that would block Avago from enforcing EP 1 770 912 before UPC courts, holding the UPC has jurisdiction for such provisional measures under Art. 32(1)(a)(c) UPCA.
• 2026-02-25UPC_CFI_692/2026Dusseldorf LDPI erteiltDüsseldorf Local Division granted provisional measures (preliminary injunction) against Yaham Recience Technology for infringement of EP 3 757 442 B1 (LED display module for temporary exhibition stands). The order was issued ex parte during the EuroShop trade fair in Düsseldorf, with penalty payments ordered for non-compliance and provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 400,000.
• 2026-02-25UPC_CFI_1927/2025Dusseldorf LDNur prozessualDüsseldorf Local Division issued a preliminary procedural order scheduling an oral hearing in the provisional measures proceedings by Ottobock against BrainPortfolio Inc. and BrainRobotics Inc. for 22 April 2026. The order set filing deadlines for the parties' written submissions in preparation for the hearing and invited parties to notify participants. This is a case management order with no substantive ruling on the merits.
• 2026-02-12UPC_CFI_723/2025Dusseldorf LDPI erteiltDüsseldorf Local Division granted provisional measures (preliminary injunction) against Angelalign defendants 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 for infringement of EP 4 346 690 B1 (dental aligner technology), with penalty payments of up to EUR 10,000 per infringing product or EUR 20,000 per day for continuing infringement, and provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 400,000. The application against defendant 3 (Angelalign Technology Inc., Cayman Islands holding company) was rejected as no actions beyond typical shareholder role were alleged.
• 2026-02-02UPC_CFI_515/2025Dusseldorf LDNur prozessualThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a further procedural order under R. 275.2 RoP in HP's logic circuitry patent provisional measures proceedings, addressing service-related steps following the December 2025 preliminary injunction order.
• 2026-02-02UPC_CFI_449/2025Dusseldorf LDNur prozessualThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a further order of good service under R. 275.2 RoP for HP's printer patent PI proceedings against Zhuhai ouguan, after additional enquiries to China's central authority produced no further response, deeming service sufficient.
• 2026-01-23UPC_CFI_808/2025Paris LDPI abgelehntThe Paris Local Division rejected Guardant Health's application for provisional measures under three patents (EP 3 591 073, EP 3 443 066, EP 3 766 986) against Sophia Genetics. The court found issues of added matter in the divisional patent and insufficient evidence to demonstrate infringement with the required degree of certainty. Guardant Health's request regarding a fourth patent (EP 3 470 533) was withdrawn during proceedings. Guardant Health ordered to pay Sophia Genetics EUR 400,000 as interim costs.