UPC CoA 67/2026
8. Mai 2026·EP3016464: METHOD FOR MEASURING DISCOVERY SIGNAL, BASE STATION, AND TERMINAL
- Verfahrensdetails
- StatusCase ClosedVerfahrensartBerufungKategorieHauptberufung
- Parteien
- Division
- Court of Appeal
- Richter
- Technology
- Telecommunications
- Sprache
- English
- Erste Entscheidung
- 19. Mai 2026
- 2026-05-19Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)Öffentlich
Zusammenfassung: The Court of Appeal rejected ASC's request for discretionary review of the Munich Local Division's order requiring ASC to provide security for costs. The application for suspensive effect was also rejected as it had become devoid of purpose once the discretionary review request was dismissed.
Rechtsfragen anzeigen (7)
- Discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP)
- Suspensive effect (R. 223 RoP)
- Security for costs
- Manifest error standard for discretionary review
- Risk of cost recovery
- FRAND licensing obligations
- Litigation insurance as alternative to security for costs
| Dokumenttitel | Datum | Öffentlich |
|---|---|---|
| action.phaseChange.caseClose | 2026-05-19 | Nicht öffentlich |
| action.issueDecision.decision | 2026-05-19 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Final Order | 2026-05-19 | Öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-05-18 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-18 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Application Respondent | 2026-05-18 | Nicht öffentlich |
| action.issueOrder.order | 2026-05-15 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Order | 2026-05-15 | Öffentlich |
| action.publishOrderDecision.case | 2026-05-15 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-05-15 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-15 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Further pleadings | 2026-05-15 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Formal Deficiency found | 2026-05-11 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Receipt | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Cover sheet | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Fee | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Proof of payment | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Exhibit Appellant | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Exhibit Appellant | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
| Statement of appeal and statement of the grounds of appeal | 2026-05-08 | Nicht öffentlich |
The discretionary review request is admissible but must be rejected as ASC failed to demonstrate that the impugned order is manifestly erroneous
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 220.3 RoP; UPC_CoA_489/2024; UPC_CoA_805/2025Xiaomi met the burden of presenting facts and evidence to support assertion of a risk of cost recovery
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 158 RoPXiaomi's licence offer and bank guarantee did not negate the risk of cost recovery since ASC did not accept the licence offer and the conditions for bank payment were not met
BeklagterRechtsgrundlage: R. 158 RoP
The Munich Local Division erred in finding a risk of cost recovery sufficient to justify security for costs
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 158 RoPXiaomi's licence offer and bank guarantee demonstrate absence of risk of cost recovery
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 158 RoPSecurity should be ordered only unless ASC provides proof of having secured litigation insurance
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 158 RoP; UPC_CoA_890/2025Application for suspensive effect should be granted pending discretionary review
KlägerRechtsgrundlage: R. 223 RoP
- 2026-05-11UPC CoA 74/2026Court of AppealAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Motorola Mobility LLC
- 2026-04-21UPC CFI 1340/2026Munich LDAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Xiaomi Inc.
- 2025-10-28UPC CFI 1321/2025Munich LDAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Xiaomi Inc.
- 2025-09-01UPC CFI 798/2025Munich LDAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Motorola Mobility LLC
- 2025-09-01UPC CFI 87/2026Munich LDMotorola Mobility LLC gegen Advanced Standard Communication LLC
- 2025-05-14UPC CFI 398/2025Munich LDAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Xiaomi Inc.
- 2024-11-06UPC CFI 617/2024Munich LDAdvanced Standard Communication LLC gegen Xiaomi Inc.
- 2026-07-06UPC CFI 2412/2026Mannheim LDFingon LLC gegen Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.
- 2026-05-04UPC CFI 1537/2026Mannheim LDMalikie Innovations Ltd. gegen Xiaomi Corporation
- 2026-04-10UPC CFI 1213/2026Mannheim LDXiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V. gegen Samsung Electronics France S.A.S.
- 2026-04-10UPC CFI 1214/2026Mannheim LDXiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V. gegen Fingon LLC
- 2026-03-06UPC CFI 847/2026Mannheim LDFingon LLC gegen Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.
- 2026-01-12UPC CFI 102/2026Munich LDXiaomi Technology Germany GmbH gegen AX Wireless, LLC
- 2025-12-31UPC CFI 1/2026Munich LDXiaomi Corporation gegen UERAN Technology LLC
- 2025-12-30UPC CFI 2294/2025Munich LDXiaomi Technology Italy S.R.L. gegen UERAN Technology LLC
- 2025-11-25UPC CFI 1733/2025Mannheim LDMalikie Innovations Ltd. gegen Xiaomi Corporation
- 2025-11-25UPC CFI 1734/2025Munich LDMalikie Innovations Ltd. gegen Xiaomi Corporation
Weitere Verfahren: Court of Appeal·2026