Outcome base rates

No merits decisions in the current scope.

• Procedural & sub-applications30

• Mannheim LD29 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
• Munich LD1 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —

• 2025-09-15UPC_APP_20197/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyOrder of the Mannheim Local Division on a review (Rule 333 RoP) of a judge-rapporteur order requiring Total Semiconductor, LLC to provide security for costs under Rule 158 RoP in an infringement action against Texas Instruments. The full panel reviewed whether the security order was justified, considering the claimant's status as a recently incorporated US-based special purpose entity funded by third-party investors with no operative business.
• 2025-09-05UPC_APP_34668/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division denied Keysight Technologies' application to stay infringement proceedings pending EPO opposition proceedings against EP 3 821 580, finding that a non-binding preliminary EPO opinion and the advanced state of UPC proceedings did not justify a stay.
• 2025-08-20UPC_APP_34743/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division (full panel) rejected Centripetal Limited's request for a further written pleading after defendants' rejoinder, confirming the judge-rapporteur's order that admitting a new infringement reading would necessitate an additional defendant brief incompatible with the scheduled oral hearing timetable.
• 2025-08-08UPC_APP_28086/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyPanel review under Rule 333 RoP of a judge-rapporteur order (App_22065/2025) that had dismissed a defendant's application to admit a new novelty attack based on new prior art (EP 3 868 480) into the counterclaim for revocation. The order concerned whether leave to amend the counterclaim should be granted under Rule 263 RoP.
• 2025-08-01UPC_APP_33206/2025Mannheim LDDismissedMannheim Local Division dismissed Centripetal Limited's request under R. 36 RoP for permission to file an additional written pleading introducing a new infringement reading in proceedings against Keysight Technologies entities (EP 3 821 580). The court held: (1) introducing a new infringement reading at this stage would require a further brief from defendants and could not be prepared before the October 2025 oral hearing; (2) defendants' rejoinder was a proper reaction to claimant's new reading in the Reply, not new independent arguments; (3) the front-loaded UPC procedure does not allow new infringement readings to be added progressively; (4) claimant had known about the disputed functionality from 2023 ITC proceedings.
• 2025-07-29UPC_APP_31764/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyOrder of the Mannheim Local Division in Malikie Innovations v Discord rejecting the defendants' request under R. 361/362 RoP that the claimant be required to appoint a domestic representative for the German national part of EP 3 716 655 pursuant to s. 25(1) German Patent Act. The court held that the UPC regime under Art. 83(1) UPCA does not require compliance with the German domestic representative requirement.
• 2025-07-18UPC_APP_24543/2025Mannheim LDNot infringedDecision of the Mannheim Local Division dismissing FUJIFILM Corporation's infringement action against Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, and Kodak Holding GmbH for the UK-validated part of EP 3 476 616. The Court found that the UPC has jurisdiction over the UK part of a European bundle patent and can assess validity as a prerequisite for infringement with inter partes effect, but that the infringement action failed on the merits (invalidity defence succeeded). The claimant bears litigation costs.
• 2025-07-17UPC_APP_28969/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyProcedural order in enforcement proceedings following a main infringement decision of 2 April 2025. Defendants applied under Rule 262A RoP for confidentiality protection over information to be rendered in the enforcement proceedings. The court ruled on multiple interrelated applications, directing parties to coordinate enforcement-related procedural submissions.