| 2025-04-11 | UPC_CFI_597/2024 | Milan CD | Revocation Action | — | Nur prozessual | Procedural order declining EOFLOW's request to file additional written submissions in the revocation action against Insulet's patent EP 4 201 327. The court noted the stage of proceedings and that the Court of Appeal's PI decision was already known to the court. |
| 2025-03-31 | UPC_CFI_412/2023 | Paris CD | Generic Order | — | Nur prozessual | Paris Central Division rejected BMW's application to rectify an order of 9 January 2025 to add a costs provision relating to an application to set aside a default judgment. The court held that the failure to address costs in the operative part could not be corrected under Rule 353 RoP (rectification of obvious slips) because costs for the set-aside application are not a separate decision on the merits but ancillary to the main default proceedings, and any costs claim must be pursued in the separate costs determination procedure. |
| 2025-02-28 | UPC_CFI_312/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | Decision on the revocation action by NJOY Netherlands B.V. against Juul Labs International Inc. concerning EP 3 504 989 (vaping/e-cigarette device). The court maintained the patent in amended form (Auxiliary Request 1, filed 22 July 2024) with effect for Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The patent as granted was found invalid. Each party bears its own costs since both parties partially succeeded. |
| 2025-01-24 | CC_49716/2024 | Munich LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order in the infringement actions by Sanofi (and successor entities) against multiple generic pharmaceutical companies (Accord, STADA, Dr Reddy's, Zentiva) concerning EP 2 493 466 (UPC_CFI_145/2024 and related cases). The order concerns case management — identifying parties and representatives across the eight consolidated cases relating to counterclaims for revocation. |
| 2025-01-22 | UPC_CFI_310/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Teilweise nichtig | The Paris Central Division partially revoked EP 3 613 453 B1, finding that claim 1 lacked inventive step; the patent was maintained in amended form based on the independent validity of claims 6, 7 and 8 in combination with claim 1 as granted. Each party bore its own costs. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_316/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | — | Nichtig erklärt | The Paris Central Division (Seat, Panel 1) revoked European patent EP 3 430 921 B1 in its entirety, with effect for Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The claimant NJOY Netherlands B.V. succeeded in demonstrating that granted claim 1 lacked clarity/added matter, and the defendant Juul Labs International Inc.'s twelve auxiliary requests were all found unallowable. A thirteenth conditional auxiliary request (2d) was rejected as unreasonably numerous and unclear. Juul Labs was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| 2025-01-14 | CC_17292/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Endgültige Untersagung | The Düsseldorf Local Division found that Mammut Sports Group AG and GmbH infringed EP 3 466 498 B1 (owned by Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH, relating to a transceiver device for avalanche rescue) and dismissed the counterclaim for revocation, maintaining the patent. The Court granted an injunction, ordered product recall and removal from distribution channels, ordered disclosure of information and accounting, and awarded EUR 3,000 in provisional damages. Indirect infringement was found because Mammut induced end-users to activate the infringing feature. The Court rejected the request for publication of the decision as Ortovox's interests were sufficiently protected by the injunction. 80% of infringement action costs borne by claimant (Ortovox) and 10% each by defendants; counterclaim costs borne equally by defendants. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_412/2023 | Paris CD | Generic application | — | Nur prozessual | The Paris Central Division (Seat) ruled on an application by ITCiCo Spain S.L. to set aside a default decision (R. 356 RoP) issued on 16 September 2024 against it in the revocation action of Bayerische Motoren Werke AG concerning EP 2 796 333. The court interpreted R. 356(2) RoP to require that the applicant demonstrate inability to comply due to reasons beyond its control (unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure). The application was considered on its merits. |
| 2025-01-08 | UPC_CFI_189/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Prozessual | Nur Kosten | Order from the Paris Central Division dated 8 January 2025 on Meril entities' application for costs (App_56782/2024) seeking reimbursement of EUR 15,000 from respondents (SWAT Medical AB and others) incurred in defending a rejected public-access-to-register application. The order clarifies that a 'decision on the merits' under R. 150 RoP means a decision concluding litigation proceedings with res judicata effect; proceedings on a public access application are not 'litigation' in that sense. The court dismissed the costs application on the basis that a public access proceeding does not produce a 'decision on the merits' that triggers the costs provisions. |
| 2024-12-26 | UPC_CFI_338/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | The Paris Central Division dismissed Advanced Bionics' revocation actions (main and counterclaims) against MED-EL's EP 4 074 373 B1 (MRI-safe disk magnet for cochlear implants), maintaining the patent in the amended version of Auxiliary Request 0a after overcoming added-matter objections; costs were allocated 70% to the claimants and 30% to the defendant. |
| 2024-12-18 | ACT_589997/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent aufrechterhalten | The Paris Central Division dismissed Tandem Diabetes Care's revocation action against Roche's EP 2 196 231 B1 (ambulatory drug infusion system), maintaining the patent as granted and ordering the claimants to bear the costs of proceedings, finding the grounds for invalidity (including lack of inventive step over prior art Diaz/Robertson/Glejboel) were not proven. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CFI_307/2024 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent aufrechterhalten | The Paris Central Division dismissed NJOY Netherlands B.V.'s revocation action against EP 2 875 740 B1 (a patent owned by VMR Products LLC relating to electronic vapour products/e-cigarettes with a magnetic cartomizer retention mechanism). The Court found the patent novel and inventive over the asserted prior art combinations (Cross + DiFonzo, Pan + DiFonzo, and common general knowledge). The patent is maintained as granted. NJOY as the unsuccessful party bears the costs up to a ceiling of EUR 500,001. |
| 2024-11-27 | UPC_CFI_308/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Nichtig erklärt | The Central Division Paris revoked European patent EP 3 456 214 (relating to a vaporizer/e-cigarette device) in its entirety. The patent was found to lack inventive step over the prior art. All auxiliary requests for partial maintenance were rejected as either unsubstantiated or unreasonable in number. The defendant (patent proprietor VMR Products LLC) was ordered to bear the litigation costs. |
| 2024-11-05 | ACT_571669/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Nichtig erklärt | Paris Central Division (Section 1) revoked European Patent EP 3 498 115 B1 (Juul Labs - vaping device cartridge) in full, with effect for Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The Court found the patent invalid for added matter (Art. 138(1)(c) / Art. 123(2) EPC). All of Juul Labs' auxiliary requests to amend the patent were rejected. Juul Labs ordered to bear costs. |
| 2024-11-05 | ACT_571801/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent aufrechterhalten | Paris Central Division (Section 1) dismissed NJOY's revocation action against EP 3 504 991 B1 (Juul Labs - vaping device cartridge). The Court found the patent valid, holding that novelty and inventive step requirements were met. NJOY as the unsuccessful party was ordered to bear Juul Labs' costs. |
| 2024-10-22 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Munich Central Division granted Dehns' (a UPC representative firm) request for access to written pleadings and evidence in the concluded Sanofi v. Amgen revocation proceedings under R.262.1(b) RoP. The Court found that since proceedings had concluded, the balance of interests normally favours granting access to third parties with a legitimate general interest. |
| 2024-10-17 | ACT_551180/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Nichtig erklärt | The Munich Section of the Central Division revoked European Patent EP 2 794 928 B1 (owned by President and Fellows of Harvard College) in its entirety, with effect in France, Germany, and the Netherlands, in a revocation action brought by NanoString Technologies Europe Limited. The Court found that the main claim lacked novelty over the prior art disclosure 'Göransson', and that all eight auxiliary requests (AR1–8) also lacked inventive step over Göransson. Harvard's auxiliary requests to amend the patent were all rejected. Harvard as the unsuccessful party must bear NanoString's legal costs. |
| 2024-09-17 | UPC_CFI_189/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Central Division (Paris) order dismissing Meril's application to reject Edwards' counterclaim for infringement as inadmissible. The court retrospectively extended the two-month deadline under Rule 49 RoP by one week to 23 July 2024, finding the counterclaim timely. The court declined to hold a hearing before deciding. |
| 2024-08-09 | UPC_CFI_122/2024 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Zurückgenommen | The Paris Central Division issued a decision following Aiko Energy Germany's withdrawal of its revocation action against Maxeon Solar's EP 3 065 184 before service on the defendant, also ruling on the reimbursement of court fees under R.370(9)(b)(i) RoP. |
| 2024-07-29 | ACT_555899/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | The Paris Central Division rejected the revocation action filed by BITZER Electronics A/S against EP 3 414 708 (claim 1), maintaining claim 1 as amended by auxiliary request II submitted during the proceedings; costs were borne 60% by the claimant and 40% by the defendant. |
| 2024-07-23 | UPC_CFI_75/2023 | Munich CD | Generic application | Prozessual | Vergleich | Order from the Munich Central Division (Section) dated 23 July 2024 disposing of two revocation actions brought by Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine against Healios K.K., Riken and Osaka University. Both parties submitted a unanimous application under R. 360 RoP declaring that they concluded the actions by settlement and that the actions were devoid of purpose. The court held that parties may settle without seeking a confirmatory court decision under R. 365 RoP and declared the proceedings closed. A 20% reimbursement of court fees was granted under R. 370.9(c) RoP. Headnotes clarify that settlement-based closures are not limited to the formal R. 365 confirmation procedure. |
| 2024-07-19 | ACT_551308/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | The Paris Central Division rejected the revocation actions filed by Meril Italy Srl and Meril GmbH/Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd against EP 3 646 825, maintaining the patent in amended form as per auxiliary request II submitted during the proceedings; costs were split 60% (claimants/counterclaimants) and 40% (defendant). |
| 2024-07-19 | CC_585030/2023 | Paris CD | Counterclaim for revocation | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | Decision of the Paris Central Division rejecting the revocation action by Meril Italy Srl and the counterclaims for revocation by Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd against Edwards Lifesciences Corporation's EP 3 646 825 (prosthetic heart valve). The patent is maintained as amended in auxiliary request II, which limits claims to a frame made up entirely of hexagonal cells. The revocation claimants (60%) and defendant (40%) share costs. |
| 2024-07-19 | CC_584916/2023 | Paris CD | Counterclaim for revocation | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Patent geändert | The Central Division (Paris) maintained Edwards Lifesciences' EP 3 646 825 (prosthetic heart valve) in amended form (Auxiliary Request II) following revocation actions and counterclaims by Meril entities. All invalidity grounds against the amended claims were rejected. |
| 2024-07-16 | CC_586764/2023 | Munich CD | Counterclaim for revocation | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Nichtig erklärt | The patent EP 3 666 797 B1 was revoked in its entirety for all Contracting Member States in which revocation was requested. The Main Request and all 17 Auxiliary Requests were found to lack inventive step. The defendant (patent proprietor Amgen) was ordered to bear the claimant's legal costs, agreed at EUR 1.375 million. |
| 2024-07-16 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Nichtig erklärt | The Munich Central Division (UPC's first-ever revocation case) revoked European patent EP 3 666 797 B1 (relating to an anti-PCSK9 antibody composition for treating hypercholesterolaemia, owned by Amgen) in its entirety for the territories of 17 UPC Contracting Member States. The patent was found to lack inventive step. All 17 auxiliary requests were also found to lack inventive step. Amgen (defendant/patent proprietor) was ordered to bear Sanofi's legal costs of EUR 1,375,000. |
| 2024-05-16 | UPC_CFI_372/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur Kosten | The Paris Central Division addressed allocation of costs following the patent proprietor's immediate surrender of EP 3 170 639 B1 in response to a revocation action, holding it is generally unfair to impose costs on a proprietor who immediately surrenders when confronted with new prior art, particularly where no prior warning notice was required. |
| 2024-04-05 | UPC_CFI_263/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The judge-rapporteur issued an interim conference order setting out procedural directions for the revocation action concerning EP 3 414 708, including discussion of the validity of the priority claim and allowable form of amendments; no substantive ruling on patentability was made. |
| 2024-03-18 | UPC_CFI_75/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division judge-rapporteur issued an interim conference order (R. 105.5 RoP) in the revocation action brought by Astellas Institute against Healios, Riken, and Osaka University concerning EP 3 056 563. The order recorded decisions taken at the interim conference to prepare for the oral hearing, including procedural directions on evidence and scheduling. |
| 2024-03-18 | UPC_CFI_80/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Order following the interim conference (R. 105.5 RoP) in the revocation action by Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine against Healios K.K. and Osaka University (EP 3 056 564) at the Munich Section of the Central Division. The court confirmed the oral hearing would proceed as planned and admitted a second expert declaration (D21) conditionally, giving the defendant limited time to reply. |
| 2024-02-24 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued a procedural order combining two related revocation actions (Sanofi v Amgen and Regeneron v Amgen) into a single proceeding, admitted additional documents into evidence, rejected a request for an interim conference, and set the value of each action at EUR 100 million. |
| 2024-01-31 | UPC_CFI_252/2024 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued orders following the interim conference in the NanoString v. Harvard revocation action, admitting document D46 as prior art, confirming the oral hearing for 17 April 2024, and setting the value of proceedings at EUR 7.5 million. |
| 2024-01-31 | ACT_551180/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division judge-rapporteur issued an interim conference order (R. 103/105.5 RoP) in the revocation action by NanoString Technologies Europe against Harvard concerning EP 2 794 928. The order recorded directions from the interim conference, including admission of document D46 with a response period for the defendant, and setting the value of proceedings at EUR 7,500,000. |
| 2024-01-31 | ACT_551180/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | Procedural order from Munich Central Division (judge-rapporteur András Kupecz) following the interim conference in a revocation action brought by NanoString Technologies Europe Limited against President and Fellows of Harvard College concerning EP 2 794 928. The order addresses admissibility of document D46 (filed as prior art in the reply): the defendant withdrew its objection, D46 was admitted into proceedings, and the defendant was given six weeks to respond in writing. Further, the judge-rapporteur indicated the case value for cost purposes. No substantive ruling. |
| 2024-01-24 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division judge-rapporteur issued a procedural order in the Sanofi v. Amgen revocation action, declining Sanofi's request to admit supplementary expert declarations filed in response to new points raised in Amgen's rejoinder, noting that the proper course was to raise the matter at the upcoming interim conference. |
| 2024-01-22 | UPC_CFI_308/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Paris Central Division issued a procedural order in the NJOY v. VMR Products revocation action, ruling on the date of service of VMR's defence to revocation, determining that service was effected on 13 December 2023 when the Registry notified the corrected defence to NJOY. |
| 2024-01-08 | UPC_CFI_263/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Paris Central Division rejected Carrier Corporation's application to stay the revocation proceedings against EP3414708 pending EPO opposition proceedings, finding that the requirement of a 'rapid decision' from the EPO was not fulfilled because no concrete timeline for the EPO ruling had been established. |
| 2023-11-20 | UPC_CFI_80/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division refused a request by Healios K.K. and Osaka University to stay UPC revocation proceedings pending a decision by the EPO, finding no concrete near-future date for an EPO decision and holding that the interests of the parties must be weighed, with the claimant's interest in timely proceedings prevailing. |
| 2023-11-17 | UPC_CFI_80/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued an order on a Rule 262A application by Astellas Institute for Regenerative Medicine to restrict access to a confidential annex, addressing the scope of access permitted to named individuals at the defendant entities Healios K.K. and Osaka University in the revocation action concerning EP 3 056 564. |
| 2023-11-13 | UPC_CFI_255/2023 | Paris CD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Nur prozessual | The Paris Central Division issued an order on a preliminary objection filed by Edwards Lifesciences Corporation challenging the competence of the Central Division to hear a revocation action by Meril Italy srl concerning EP 3 646 825, raising issues of same parties and Article 33(2) UPCA. |
| 2023-10-30 | UPC_CFI_252/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division ordered Harvard College (claimant/defendant in revocation action) to provide security for legal costs under Article 69(4) UPCA and Rule 158 RoP, finding legitimate concern about enforcement of a potential cost order against NanoString Technologies Europe (a UK-based entity) in light of a preliminary injunction already imposed. |
| 2023-10-11 | UPC_CFI_75/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued a Rule 9 RoP procedural order directing parties to use the CMS and designated workflows for all submissions, clarifying that system-generated notifications constitute electronic service under Rules 278.1 and 271.6 RoP, in the revocation action by Astellas. |
| 2023-10-11 | UPC_CFI_80/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division issued a Rule 9 RoP procedural order directing parties to use the CMS and designated workflows for all submissions and limiting external correspondence to a minimum, in the revocation action by Astellas against Healios K.K. and Osaka University. |
| 2023-10-04 | UPC_CFI_252/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division ordered that a preliminary objection based on Articles 29 and 30 Brussels Ibis Regulation (lis pendens / related actions) be dealt with in the main proceedings rather than separately, for reasons of procedural economy and efficiency under Rule 20.2 RoP. |
| 2023-09-21 | UPC_CFI_75/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Munich Central Division rejected a Rule 262.1(b) request for public access to written pleadings, holding that 'education and training' does not constitute a concrete and verifiable legitimate reason, and that there is no legal basis to grant access to a letter for service. |
| 2023-09-20 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Nichtigkeit (Hauptsache) | Abgewiesen | The Munich Central Division rejected an anonymous individual's R. 262.1(b) RoP application for access to pleadings and evidence filed in Sanofi's revocation action against Amgen (EP patent, case UPC_CFI_1/2023), holding that a personal and professional interest in forming an opinion on patent validity is not a legitimate reason for granting third-party access to the case file. |
| 2023-08-24 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Nur prozessual | The Central Division (Munich) rejected Amgen's preliminary objection challenging jurisdiction over Sanofi's revocation action, holding that the UPC Registry functions as a single receiving mailbox for the whole court and that the action was validly filed. |
| 2023-07-05 | UPC_CFI_188/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Paris Central Division standing judge ruled that a case forwarded under Rule 16.5 RoP had been incorrectly referred as an urgent action, and redirected it to the Registry for normal processing under Rule 16.3 RoP. |
| 2023-06-29 | UPC_CFI_1/2023 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Central Division (Munich) issued a procedural order admitting Sanofi's supplementary exhibits to the Statement of Claim (filed via generic application) and confirming the date of service of the Statement for Revocation on Amgen. |
| 2023-06-16 | ORD_464985/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Prozessual | Nur prozessual | The Central Division (Paris) ordered the redistribution of Astellas Institute's revocation action against Healios K.K., Riken and Osaka University concerning EP 3 056 563 B1 to the Munich Section in accordance with Rule 17.3 RoP. |