UPClytics
DeutschEnglish
AnmeldenRegistrieren
Alle Fälle anzeigen

ACT 65376/2024

—·EP3611989 +1 more: METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRANSMITTING WIRELESS LOCAL AREA NETWORK INFORMATION

Verfahrensdetails
Status
—
Verfahrensart
Einstweilige Verfügung
Kategorie
Einstweilige Maßnahmen
Parteien
Kläger
Vertreter: Tobias Hessel (Clifford Chance); Christian Harmsen (Bird & Bird LLP)
Division
Munich LD
Richter
Technology
Telecommunications
Sprache
—
Erste Entscheidung
11. Dez. 2024
Entscheidungen
  • 2024-12-11
    PI erteiltEinstweilige VerfügungApplication for provisional measures

    The Munich Local Division granted Huawei an anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction ordering Netgear to withdraw its anti-enforcement injunction application before a US court (C.D. Cal.) that sought to prevent Huawei from enforcing its SEP patents (EP 3 611 989 and EP 3 678 321) before the UPC, holding that such foreign proceedings violate the EU Charter right to access to justice.

    Rechtsfragen:anti-suit injunction / anti-enforcement injunction Art. 32(1)(a)(c) UPCAstandard-essential patents FRANDArt. 47 EU Charter access to justiceUPC jurisdiction for AASI
Dokumente
  • 2024-12-11%20ACT_65376-2024%20UPC_CFI_791-2024%20AASI%20AEI%20redacted.pdf2024-12-11DE
Abdeckung: Teilweise.Begründung teilweise extrahiert — einige Abschnitte können unvollständig sein.
Zusammenfassung in einfacher Sprache

Huawei applied for an anti-anti-suit / anti-enforcement injunction against Netgear, which had filed a US proceeding (C.D. Cal.) seeking to prevent Huawei from enforcing its SEP patents (EP 3 611 989 and EP 3 678 321) at the UPC. The Munich Local Division granted the measure, holding that the UPC has jurisdiction to issue such orders, and that foreign anti-enforcement injunctions violate the EU Charter right of access to justice (Art. 47) and constitute a tortious act under German law. Netgear was ordered to immediately withdraw its US application on pain of daily fines up to EUR 250,000.

Angenommene Argumente
Was das Gericht akzeptiert hat — nach Partei.

  • UPC has jurisdiction under Art. 32(1)(a) and (c) UPCA to issue anti-anti-suit / anti-enforcement injunctions against foreign proceedings threatening UPC access

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 32(1)(a)(c) UPCA

    Hinweis: The Munich Local Division established UPC subject-matter jurisdiction for AASI/AEI measures against Netgear's US court proceedings.

  • Foreign anti-suit and anti-enforcement injunctions violate the fundamental EU right of access to justice and constitute a tort under German law

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 47 EU Charter; Art. 2(1), 19(4) GG; § 823(1) BGB

    Hinweis: The court found that Netgear's US AEI application before the C.D. Cal. violated Huawei's EU Charter right to access to justice and constituted an unlawful act under German tort law.

  • Provisional measures including requirement to withdraw the US AEI application within 24 hours are appropriate

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA

    Hinweis: The court ordered Netgear to withdraw its C.D. Cal. AEI application within 24 hours of service, or face fines up to EUR 250,000 per day.

Zurückgewiesene Argumente
Was das Gericht nicht akzeptiert hat — und warum.

Keine zurückgewiesenen Argumente erfasst.

Zentrale Rechtsgrundsätze
In der Begründung herangezogene Doktrinen und Regeln.
anti-anti-suit injunction (AASI) / anti-enforcement injunction (AEI) jurisdiction at UPCEU Charter right to access to justice (Art. 47)foreign anti-enforcement injunctions as unlawful acts under German lawFRAND / SEP context for access to justice protection

Weitere Fälle zu diesem Grundsatz ansehen.