UPC APP 1176/2025
EP4072364 Unitary patent +1 more · PROTECTIVE DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MAKING SAID PROTECTIVE DEVICE
- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryOther procedural
- Parties
- Claimants
- Dainese S.p.A.Operating co.
Respondents- Alpinestars S.p.A.Operating co.
- Alpinestars Research S.p.A.Operating co.
- Omnia Retail S.r.l.Operating co.
- Horizon Moto 95 - Maxxess CergyOperating co.
- Zund.stoff AugsburgOperating co.
- MOTOCARD BIKE, S.L.Operating co.
- Division
- Milan LD
- Technology
- Mechanical engineeringTransport
- Other fieldsOther consumer goods
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Jan 15, 2025
- EPO Opposition
- Alpinestars S.p.A.Admissible2022-06-08
- Alpinestars S.p.A.Admissible2024-10-03
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Milan LD | Locked |
| Judge Pierluigi Perrotti | Locked |
| Judge Alima Zana | Locked |
| Judge Anna-Lena Klein | Locked |
| Judge Graham Ashley | Locked |
At the UPC: Dainese S.p.A. (17 cases)·Alpinestars S.p.A. (14 cases)
This dispute contains 16 other proceedings
UPC CoA 97/2026·UPC CFI 1781/2026·UPC CoA 931/2025·UPC CFI 182/2025·UPC CFI 831/2024 and 11 more
- 2025-01-15
Summary: Milan Local Division granted Alpinestars S.p.A.'s request to extend the deadline for filing its Statement of Defence and counterclaim for revocation from 20 January 2025 to 20 February 2025, to allow the outcome of EPO appeal proceedings concerning EP 3 498 117 (oral hearing on 13 February 2025) to be incorporated. The court held that extending time limits, rather than staying proceedings, best balances procedural efficiency and the right to be heard in light of concurrent EPO appeal proceedings.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Extension of time limits under Rule 9 RoP
- Coordination of UPC and EPO appeal proceedings
- Stay of proceedings vs extension of deadlines under Rule 118 and Rule 295 RoP
- EA0C8A90285A85682187B5139080C7AC_en.pdf2025-01-15EN