UPC CFI 100/2024

Vor dem UPC: Ona Patents SL (16 Verfahren)·Google Ireland Limited (12 Verfahren)

• 2026-01-15
  Infringement ActionÖffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: Final decision on the merits in the infringement action by Ona Patents SL against Google Ireland Limited and others (EP 2 263 098 B1, Wi-Fi positioning patent). The court dismissed the infringement action, finding no direct infringement (the accused product did not possess every claimed component). The counterclaim for revocation was also dismissed (patent maintained as valid). Claimant to bear costs of the infringement action; 80% of counterclaim costs to defendants, 20% to claimant. Value in dispute: EUR 6,000,000 (infringement) and EUR 9,000,000 (counterclaim). Key headnotes: register governs proprietor standing; each component of a product must be present for direct infringement.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (5)

  • Direct infringement (Art. 25 UPCA)
  • Indirect infringement (Art. 26 UPCA)
  • Patent proprietor standing (Rule 25, Rule 42, Rule 8.6 RoP)
  • Register as determining proprietor
  • Product components and direct infringement
• 2025-10-14
  Öffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a further procedural order under R. 35 and 36 RoP in the Ona Patents v Google infringement proceedings (EP 2 263 098), addressing procedural steps in the case.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (1)

  • Case management order (R. 35, 36 RoP)
• 2025-10-13
  Application RoP 333Öffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a R. 333 RoP review order in the Ona Patents v Google infringement proceedings concerning EP 2 263 098 B1 (Wi-Fi positioning), addressing procedural aspects of the case management.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (2)

  • Review of procedural order (R. 333 RoP)
  • Wi-Fi positioning patent
• 2025-08-01
  Öffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: Procedural order requiring further written submissions from the parties in the infringement action concerning patent ownership and the presentation of exhibits. The court noted inconsistencies in the claimant's statements on patent ownership and directed supplementary presentations.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (3)

  • Patent ownership and standing (Rule 9.1, Rule 35 RoP)
  • Presentation of exhibits
  • Inconsistent claimant statements on proprietorship
• 2025-04-14
  Öffentlich

  Zusammenfassung: The Düsseldorf Local Division exercised its discretion under Art.33(3)(a) UPCA to hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation jointly in the Ona Patents v Google case concerning EP2263098, finding that a joint hearing was appropriate for reasons of efficiency and enabling simultaneous decision on validity and infringement.

  Rechtsfragen anzeigen (3)

  • Bifurcation decision (Art. 33(3) UPCA, R.37 RoP)
  • Joint hearing of infringement and revocation counterclaim
  • Procedural efficiency