UPC Analytics
DEEN
Übersicht · Eingereicht: —

UPC_CFI_361/2025

DETERMINISTIC UE BEHAVIOUR FOR CSI/SRS REPORTING DURING DRX

VerletzungHauptverletzungsklageParis LDInfringement Action—
ÜbersichtEntscheidungenBegründungZitateDokumenteZeitverlauf
Dieser Fall zitiert
In den Entscheidungen dieses Falls zitierte Quellen.

Verfahrensordnung · 9

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
220.2proceduralBindendto any breach of the duty of confi- dentiality by any member of their team to whom they have granted access. 15 This order may be appealed in accordance with Rule 220.2 RoP. Issued in Paris, on 31 July 202
19noveltyBindendPAGES] 1 Paris Local Division UPC_CFI_361/2025 Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 30/10/2025 Preliminary Objection (R.19 RoP) CLAIMANT 1) Sun Patent Trust 437 Madison Avenue, 35th Floor 10022 - New York - US
9.3FRANDBindendSUN PATENT brought before the present Division an infringement action against VIVO. On 26 August 2025, the judge rapporteur granted an extension of time under R. 9.3 RoP, ordering that a potential preliminary objection (PO) could be filed by 28 Septe
19.1 (a)FRANDBindende (SoD) be filed by 28 November 2025. On 29 September 2025 (28 September was a Sunday), VIVO filed a PO arguing primarily that the UPC lacks jurisdiction under R.19.1 (a) RoP, claiming that only a FRAND defence can be dealt with by the UPC, but that
19.1 (b)jurisdictionBindendthis case, SUN PATENT requested a ruling on this issue as the main claim. In addition, VIVO contests the internal competence of the Paris Local Division under R. 19.1 (b) RoP. VIVO asks the Court to: -allow the objection and dismiss the action in its
20.1jurisdictionBindendto: -allow the objection and dismiss the action in its entirety, in the alternative partly, as inadmissible; -decide on the preliminary objection according to R. 20.1 RoP as soon as practicable after the expiry of the period referred to in R. 19.5 Ro
19.5jurisdictionBindendive partly, as inadmissible; -decide on the preliminary objection according to R. 20.1 RoP as soon as practicable after the expiry of the period referred to in R. 19.5 RoP and not defer a decision on the preliminary objection until a decision in the
20.2proceduralBindendthe expiry of the period referred to in R. 19.5 RoP and not defer a decision on the preliminary objection until a decision in the main proceedings according to R. 20.2 RoP; The stay request was dealt with by a preliminary order issued on 13 October 2
20.2jurisdictionBindende defendants. In this context, the court considers that it is appropriate to rule on the admissibility of claim A.II in the main proceedings in accordance with Rule 20.2 RoP. II) The competence of the Paris Local Division (R. 19.1 (b) and Art. 33 UPC

courtName.other · 4

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
58proceduralBindendtime of the oral hearing. The panel orders that: I- Confidential information 1-The following information is classified as “confidential” within the meaning of Art. 58 UPCA and R. 262A RoP, as mentioned below: 2-Access to the “confidential information
63proceduralBindendm (whether acting by their directors, officers, employees, agents or otherwise howsoever) from infringing European patent No. EP 3 852 468 with unitary effect (Article 63 UPCA) in the Contracting Member States (…) The court considers that it follows
32.1FRANDBindendringement. Thus, the question is whether the FRAND condition raised by the Claimant at the time of the SoC is admissible as it falls within or not the scope of Art. 32.1 UPCA. Against this background, in any event, the UPC has jurisdiction to hear th
33jurisdictionBindendle on the admissibility of claim A.II in the main proceedings in accordance with Rule 20.2 RoP. II) The competence of the Paris Local Division (R. 19.1 (b) and Art. 33 UPCA) VIVO contests the territorial competence of the Paris LD in the case at hand

UPC (Erstinstanz) · 3

QuelleRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
UPC_CFI_361/2025proceduralBindend[FIRST PAGES] 1 Paris Local Division UPC_CFI_361/2025 Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 31/07/2025 concerning the protection of confidential information APPLI
UPC_CFI_181/2025proceduralBindendnother UPC LD: “This follows from the fact that effecƟve protecƟon of confiden- Ɵal informaƟon also requires clear accountability” (LD Düsseldorf, 15 July 2025, UPC_CFI_181/2025). This should be requested via a further specific applicaƟon. At this stag
UPC_CFI_361/2025proceduralBindend[FIRST PAGES] 1 Paris Local Division UPC_CFI_361/2025 Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 30/10/2025 Preliminary Objection (R.19 RoP) CLAIMANT 1) Sun Patent Trust 437 Madi
Zitiert in
Spätere UPC-Entscheidungen, die diesen Fall zitieren.
Zitiert inDatumRechtsfrageBindungskraftAuszug
UPC_CFI_361/2025

Paris LD

21. Juli 2025proceduralBindend[FIRST PAGES] 1 Paris Local Division UPC_CFI_361/2025 Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 31/07/2025 concerning the protection of confidential information APPLI
UPC_CFI_361/2025

Paris LD

30. Okt. 2025proceduralBindend[FIRST PAGES] 1 Paris Local Division UPC_CFI_361/2025 Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 30/10/2025 Preliminary Objection (R.19 RoP) CLAIMANT 1) Sun Patent Trust 437 Madi
UPC_CoA_791/2025

Court of Appeal

26. Jan. 2026Paris LD confidentiality order (impugned)Hintergrundconfidentiality obligations set out by the Paris LD (order of 31 July 2025, UPC_CFI_361/2025 and UPC_CFI_362/2025)
UPC_CoA_755/2025

Court of Appeal

31. Okt. 2025Paris LD FRAND infringement actionHintergrundOn 18 April 2025 SUN PATENT brought an infringement action against VIVO before the Court of First Instance, Paris Local Division ... (ACT_18933/2025 UPC_CFI_361/2025)
UPC_CoA_755/2025

Court of Appeal

23. Sept. 2025Paris LD FRAND infringement action — basis for appealHintergrundOn 18 April 2025, SUN PATENT brought two actions against VIVO before the Court of First Instance, Paris Local Division (ACT_18933/2025 UPC_CFI_361/2025)