View all cases
- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryCase management orders
- Parties
- Claimants
- Panasonic Holdings CorporationOperating co.
Representatives- Christopher Weber-Kather Augenstein
Respondents- OROPE Germany GmbHOperating co.
- Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.Operating co.
Representatives- Andreas Kramer
- Division
- Mannheim LD
- Judges
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringTelecommunications · Digital communication
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Jun 27, 2024
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Mannheim LD | Locked |
| Judge Peter Tochtermann | Locked |
At the UPC: Panasonic Group (81 cases)·OPPO Group (57 cases)
Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patentThis dispute contains 9 other proceedings
UPC CoA 298/2024·CC 596895/2023·UPC CoA 476/2023·UPC CFI 210/2023·ORD 7452/2024 and 4 more
5 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
UPC CoA 543/2024·UPC CFI 332/2024·CC 591342/2023·UPC CFI 219/2023·UPC CFI 331/2024
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: Mannheim LD·2024
Decisions
- 2024-06-27
Summary: The Mannheim Local Division issued case management guidance in Panasonic v. OPPO covering claim construction requirements, amendment applications, and the admissibility of the FRAND declaratory relief counterclaim, including on late patent amendment applications.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Claim construction requirements in statement of claim
- Late patent amendment Rule 30.2 RoP
- FRAND counterclaim admissibility
- Reply to revocation counterclaim
Documents
- 24F708BBF5E82D8C53E73CE2EEEE677C_de.pdf2024-06-27DE