ACT 545551/2023

—·EP2568724: Radio Communication Device and Radio Communication Method

Case details: Status
—
Action
Infringement
Category
Main Infringement Action
Parties: Claimants
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
Reps: Christopher Weber
Respondents
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.
OROPE Germany GmbH
Reps: Andreas Kramer
Division: Mannheim LD
Judges: Peter Tochtermann · Presiding Judge and Judge-Rapporteur
Dirk Böttcher · Legally Qualified Judge
Edger Brinkman · Legally Qualified Judge
Klaus Loibner · Technically Qualified Judge
Technology: Telecoms · Cellular/SEP · Telecommunications
Language: —
First decided: Sep 16, 2024
Last decision: Nov 22, 2024

Claims

At issueall

Infringedall

Notes: Mannheim LD found OPPO/OROPE infringed EP2568724 B1; counterclaim for revocation and FRAND counterclaim dismissed; specific claim numbers not visible in operative parts of excerpts.

Decisions

2024-11-22
InfringedInjunction grantedInfringement meritsInfringement Action
The Mannheim Local Division found that Guangdong OPPO and OROPE Germany infringed Panasonic's EP 2 568 724 (radio communication patent), granted injunction, recall and other relief, while dismissing the invalidity counterclaim and the FRAND counterclaim.
Legal issues:Patent infringementInvalidity counterclaimFRAND/SEP counterclaimInjunction and ancillary relief

Documents

308AF9B9C8A3DF35034DC00828CE3CF6_de.pdf2024-11-22DE

Coverage: Thin.Reasoning extracted with limited coverage — see decisions tab for full text.

Plain-English summary

Panasonic Holdings Corporation sued Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications and its German subsidiary OROPE Germany before the Mannheim Local Division for infringement of EP 2 568 724 B1, a standard-essential patent relating to radio communication devices. The court found infringement, granted injunction and ancillary relief, and dismissed both OPPO's invalidity counterclaim and its FRAND counterclaim. The decision is issued in German and concerns the standard proceedings structure of a SEP case at the UPC.

Accepted arguments

What the court agreed with — by party.

Infringement of EP 2 568 724 B1 (radio communication patent) by OPPO and OROPE in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden
ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 25 UPCA
Note: Court accepted infringement, granting injunction, recall, removal and destruction, information disclosure, and damages declaration.

Rejected arguments

What the court did not agree with — and why.

Invalidity counterclaim against EP 2 568 724 B1
Respondent
Reason: Dismissed in full; patent held valid (specific grounds not detailed in available excerpt).
FRAND counterclaim — willingness to take a FRAND license precluding injunction
RespondentLegal basis: FRAND / SEP licensing principles
Reason: FRAND counterclaim dismissed; defendants' FRAND defense was rejected on the merits (specific reasoning not visible in the first/last pages excerpt).

Key legal principles

Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.

FRAND SEP infringement — injunction not automatically barred by FRAND commitment where defendant's counterclaim fails on the merits

Browse other cases on this principle.