UPClytics
DeutschEnglish
AnmeldenRegistrieren
Alle Fälle anzeigen

UPC CFI 1291/2026

16. Apr. 2026·EP3799333 +3 more: ALLOCATION OF PREAMBLE SEQUENCES

SEP (unklar)
Verfahrensdetails
Status
Written Phase
Verfahrensart
Einstweilige Verfügung
Kategorie
Einstweilige Maßnahmen
Parteien
Division
Mannheim LD
Richter
Technology
Telecommunications
Sprache
German
Erste Entscheidung
20. Apr. 2026
Entscheidungen
  • 2026-04-20
    PI erteiltEinstweilige VerfügungApplication for provisional measures

    The UPC Local Division Mannheim granted an ex parte Anti-Anti Suit Injunction (AASI) prohibiting the respondents (Geely entities) from pursuing or maintaining their application before the Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court for an 'Interim Licence' or equivalent measure that would prevent the claimants (Nokia entities) from enforcing their European patents before the UPC. The respondents were ordered to withdraw the interim licence application within 24 hours of service, subject to a maximum penalty of EUR 50,000,000 and an additional EUR 500,000 per day of continued non-compliance. The order is immediately enforceable but lapses if claimants do not provide security of EUR 600,000 within 20 days.

    Rechtsfragen:Jurisdiction of UPC Local Division Mannheim to issue an Anti-Anti Suit Injunction (AASI) under Art. 31, 32(1)(c) UPCAWhether an interim licence application before a Chinese court constitutes an anti-suit injunction in substance affecting UPC patent enforcementRight of patent holders to access courts and enforce patents as an inherent aspect of patent rights (Art. 47 EU Charter, Art. 6 ECHR)Comity and non-interference with foreign jurisdictions' adjudicative sovereigntyUrgency and balance of interests justifying ex parte provisional measures under Art. 62(2) UPCA, R. 211.3 RoPSecurity for costs obligation under Art. 62(5), 60(7) UPCA, R. 211.5 RoPApplication of EU competition law (Art. 101, 102 TFEU) to SEP/FRAND disputes before the UPCWTO ruling (WT/DS611/ARB25) on China's anti-suit injunction policy and TRIPS complianceAstreinte/penalty payments under R. 354.3 RoP for non-compliance with provisional measuresObligation to set deadline for main proceedings under R. 213.1 RoPNotification of EU Commission under Art. 6 and 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003
Dokumente
DokumenttitelDatumÖffentlich
Receipt2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Application document Defendant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Application document Defendant2026-05-28Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Application document Claimant2026-05-27Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-20Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-20Nicht öffentlich
Application document Defendant2026-05-20Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Further pleadings2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Application document Applicant2026-05-19Nicht öffentlich
Other Documents2026-04-24Öffentlich
action.communication.general2026-04-22Nicht öffentlich
action.publishOrderDecision.case2026-04-22Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Further pleadings2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Receipt2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Further pleadings2026-04-21Nicht öffentlich
Service Receipt/Service Document2026-04-20Nicht öffentlich
Service Receipt/Service Document2026-04-20Nicht öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-04-20Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-04-20Öffentlich
action.issueOrder.order2026-04-20Nicht öffentlich
Order2026-04-20Öffentlich
Receipt2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Cover sheet2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Fee2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Application for provisional measures2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Exhibit Claimant2026-04-16Nicht öffentlich
Angenommene Argumente
Was das Gericht akzeptiert hat — nach Partei.

  • The UPC has jurisdiction under Art. 31, 32(1)(c) UPCA as the locus of the threatened infringement of patent rights is within the UPC's jurisdiction; the respondents' application before the Chinese court would effectively prevent claimants from enforcing UPC-jurisdictional patents before the UPC Local Divisions Mannheim and Munich.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 31, 32(1)(a)(c), 33(1)(a) UPCA; Art. 7(2), 71b No. 2 Brussels Ia Regulation

  • The right to enforce patents in court proceedings is inherent in the patent right itself, encompassing both substantive and procedural enforceability; a measure preventing exercise of this right constitutes an interference with the patent owner's property rights.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 ff. UPCA; Art. 47(1)(2) EU Charter; Art. 17(2) EU Charter; Art. 6 ECHR

  • The Geely 'Interim Licence' application before the Chinese court is in substance an anti-suit injunction aimed at preventing Nokia from obtaining injunctions in foreign forums including the UPC, evidenced by the list of non-confidential exhibits (AR3, Group 3 Evidence) explicitly referencing prevention of threatened injunctions in other jurisdictions.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 206 RoP; Art. 62 UPCA

  • The threatened application is abusive and contrary to principles of comity and EU acquis communautaire; no justified reason exists for a worldwide interim licence to protect the Chinese rate-setting proceedings, especially since Nokia's application expressly does not challenge the main rate-setting proceedings.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 101, 102 TFEU; Art. 20 UPCA; EuGH BSH/Electrolux (25 February 2025) Rn. 71, 73

  • Urgency is established because the Hangzhou court had scheduled a hearing on the interim licence application for 23 April 2026, immediately threatening enforcement before the UPC proceedings could be concluded; an ex parte order was justified to prevent irreparable harm from delay caused by prior hearing of the respondents.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 206.3, 209(c), 212.1 RoP; Art. 62(2) UPCA

  • The daily penalty of up to EUR 1,000,000 RMB (~EUR 124,000) potentially imposed by the Chinese court in case of non-compliance with a preservation order constitutes a serious and immediate threat justifying the provisional measure, particularly as such orders are known to be enforced by the Chinese Supreme People's Court.

    KlägerRechtsgrundlage: Art. 62 UPCA; R. 354.3 RoP
Zurückgewiesene Argumente
Was das Gericht nicht akzeptiert hat — und warum.

  • The pending parallel proceedings before the Landgericht München I create lis pendens or otherwise preclude UPC jurisdiction over the AASI.

    BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: Art. 33 UPCA