| 2026-02-02 | UPC_CFI_657/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Kosten | Nur Kosten | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a cost decision following the merits judgment of 16 June 2025 (10x Genomics v. Curio Bioscience), apportioning costs of PI proceedings and main action proceedings at a 30%/70% ratio (claimant/defendant) based on the parties' respective success. |
| 2026-02-02 | UPC_CFI_658/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Kosten | Nur Kosten | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a costs decision in the 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience proceedings (EP 2 697 391), establishing that costs of PI proceedings and main proceedings are capped separately, that mixing of costs between proceedings is inadmissible, and that in partial success the ceiling is reduced proportionally. |
| 2025-11-11 | UPC_CFI_879/2025 | Mannheim LD | Application For Costs | Kosten | Zurückgenommen | The Mannheim Local Division permitted the withdrawal of Faro Technologies' application for cost assessment (Kostenfestsetzung) against Blankenhorn GmbH following an out-of-court settlement between the parties, with no costs order. |
| 2025-08-26 | UPC_APP_33511/2025 | Munich LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Local Division ruled on Taylor Wessing LLP's application for access to written pleadings and evidence under Rule 262.1(b) RoP in NEC Corporation's infringement action against TCL entities concerning EP 2 645 714. |
| 2025-08-19 | UPC_CFI_131/2025 | Brussels LD | Generic Order | Kosten | Nur prozessual | Final rectification order from the Brussels Local Division dated 19 August 2025 pursuant to R. 353 RoP, correcting a material error (arithmetic mistake) in an earlier costs order. The order clarifies that a rectification under R. 353 RoP is limited to correcting material errors, clerical mistakes and arithmetic errors, and cannot be used to reopen the reasoning of the earlier decision. The court also held that a rectification order does not affect the time limits for appeal relating to alleged legal errors in the original decision. |
| 2025-05-13 | UPC_APP_45185/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Kosten | Nur Kosten | Düsseldorf Local Division determined costs in UPC_CFI_7/2023 (Franz Kaldewei GmbH & Co. KG v Bette GmbH & Co. KG, first-ever UPC decision on the merits). The court ordered Bette (the unsuccessful defendant) to reimburse Kaldewei EUR 84,950 in total costs, rejecting Bette's challenge to the reasonableness of the amount. The court noted the extra effort required for the first substantive UPC decision as a justification for higher costs. |
| 2025-05-02 | UPC_CFI_131/2025 | Brussels LD | Application For Costs | Kosten | Nur Kosten | Provisional Procedural Order IV in the costs proceedings brought by OrthoApnea S.L. and Vivisol B BV against an anonymised defendant. The Judge-Rapporteur suspended the costs proceedings pending the outcome of the defendant's appeal against the merits decision (UPC_CFI_376/2023 / UPC_CoA) on grounds of fairness, since the costs outcome depends on the appeal outcome. |
| 2025-05-02 | UPC_CFI_131/2025 | Brussels LD | Application For Costs | Kosten | Nur Kosten | The Brussels Local Division (judge-rapporteur Samuel Granata, in Dutch) issued Provisional Procedural Order IV, suspending the costs proceedings (ACT_7974/2025, requesting EUR 92,814.62 in costs from the anonymised defendant) pending the Court of Appeal's decision on the merits of the underlying dispute. The order instructs the successful party to notify the judge-rapporteur of the outcome once the Court of Appeal has decided, so that a final costs decision can be rendered. |
| 2025-01-03 | UPC_APP_61570/2024 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division granted Berggren Oy's application under Rule 262.1(b) RoP for access to all written pleadings and evidence filed in the NanoString v. Harvard revocation action, given Berggren's professional interest as a UPC representative firm. |
| 2024-11-04 | UPC_APP_54214/2024 | Munich CD | Application Rop262 3 | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Central Division (Munich) addressed Mathys & Squire LLP's request for access to pleadings under Rule 262.1(b) RoP in the Astellas v. Healios revocation action, ruling on confidentiality of certain pipeline information following the parties' settlement. |
| 2024-10-22 | UPC_APP_47154/2024 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division Section ruled on a third-party access application (R. 262.1(b) RoP) by Dehns (a large UPC representative firm) seeking access to all written pleadings and evidence in the Amgen-Regeneron revocation and counterclaim proceedings concerning EP 3 666 797 (decided on 16 July 2024). The court distinguished between procedural documents falling and not falling within the categories of 'written pleadings' and 'evidence', granting access to the qualifying documents. |
| 2024-08-22 | UPC_APP_588681/2023 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division granted Mathys & Squire's application for public access under R.262.1(b) RoP to written pleadings and evidence in the settled Astellas v Healios revocation proceedings (EP 3 056 563), holding that after settlement the integrity of proceedings is no longer at stake and public access should normally be granted. |
| 2024-08-12 | UPC_APP_36807/2024 | Vienna LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Order on a public-access application (R. 262.1(b) RoP) filed by DMV industrijski kontrolni sistemi d.o.o. seeking access to pleadings and evidence in an ongoing infringement case (SWARCO Futurit v. STRABAG, Vienna Local Division) involving EP 2 643 717. The court held that, for pending proceedings, a third-party applicant must show a legally qualified interest (beyond mere informational or economic interest) to outweigh the interest in protecting the integrity of ongoing proceedings. The application was denied as the proceedings were still pending. |
| 2024-07-10 | ORD_35569/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in MED-EL v Advanced Bionics (UPC_CFI_410/2023, EP 4 074 373) concerning the referral of the counterclaim for revocation and patent amendment request to the Central Division. Following a parallel central revocation action (ACT_576555/2023, UPC_CFI_338/2023) which was already near completion, the Court addressed the question of whether to refer the counterclaim and the parties' submissions on that issue. |
| 2024-07-06 | UPC_APP_15611/2024 | Munich LD | Application RoP262A | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Confidentiality order (R. 262A RoP) by Munich Local Division in Panasonic v OPPO/OROPE proceedings concerning EP 3 024 163. The court granted a confidentiality regime for disputed documents, granting each side (claimant: 3 persons, defendants: 4 persons) access to confidential materials. The scope was aligned with the handling in parallel proceedings against Xiaomi. |
| 2023-12-28 | UPC_APP_588681/2023 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued a preliminary order in a Rule 262.1(b) access-to-file application by Mathys & Squire LLP, deciding to await the outcome of pending Court of Appeal proceedings on a related access application before ruling on the present request. |