UPC_CoA_570/2024

Court of Appeal dismissed Microsoft's request for discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP) of the Paris Central Division's order refusing to declare Suinno's infringement action manifestly inadmissible under Rule 361 RoP on account of alleged lack of independence of Suinno's representative. The CoA held that the manifestly inadmissible threshold under Rule 361 RoP requires clear-cut cases without in-depth analysis, and that the CFI's refusal to find manifest inadmissibility was not an appropriate case for discretionary review.