UPClytics
View all cases

ORD 9091/2025

·EP2263098B1

Case details
Status
Action
Procedural application
Category
Case Management Orders
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Christof Augenstein (Kather Augenstein); Benedikt Walesch (Kather Augenstein); Melissa Lutz (Kather Augenstein)
Respondents
Reps: Tilman Müller-Stoy (Bardehle Pagenberg); Tobias Wuttke (Bardehle Pagenberg)
Division
Dusseldorf LD
Judges
Language
First decided
Apr 14, 2025
Decisions
  • 2025-04-14
    Generic Order

    Düsseldorf Local Division decided, with the consent of the parties, to hear both the infringement action by Ona Patents SL against Apple Inc. (and affiliates) and Apple's counterclaim for revocation jointly, rather than bifurcating under Art. 33(3) UPCA. The court exercised its discretion under Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA in favour of joint hearing for reasons of efficiency and to ensure consistent interpretation of the patent by a single panel.

    Legal issues:Bifurcation of infringement and revocation proceedings under Art. 33(3) UPCAJoint hearing of infringement and counterclaim for revocation under Rule 37 RoPProcedural efficiency
Documents
  • EBF24C1A8E8664EACA395BEB60F3063C_en.pdf2025-04-14EN