View all cases
- Case details
- Status—Action—CategoryOther procedural
- Parties
- Claimants
- Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.Operating co.
Representatives- Bolko Ehlgen-Linklaters LLP
- Julia Schönbohm-Linklaters LLP
- Olaf Isfortsupporting-Schneiders & Behrendt
Respondents- expert e-Commerce GmbHOperating co.
- expert klein GmbHOperating co.
Representatives- Dirk Jestaedt-Krieger Mes & Graf von der Groeben
- Bernhard Ganahlsupporting-HGF Europe LLP
- Division
- —
- Judges
- —
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringSemiconductors
- Language
- —
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
At the UPC: Seoul Semiconductor Group (29 cases)·expert e-Commerce GmbH (14 cases)
Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patentThis dispute contains 16 other proceedings
UPC CoA 380/2025·UPC CFI 823/2024·UPC CFI 824/2024·UPC CFI 677/2024·UPC CoA 762/2024 and 11 more
1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: 2024
Decisions
- 2024-01-20
Summary: The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in Seoul Viosys v. expert e-Commerce, rejecting the defendants' application for an extension of the deadline to file their statement of defence and counterclaim for revocation, applying the strict UPC time limits regime.
Show the legal issues (2)
- Rule 9.3 RoP: extension of time limits for statement of defence
- Strict time limits regime under UPC RoP
Documents
- 2024-01-20%20LD%20D%C3%BCsseldorf%20UPC_CFI%20363-2023%20ORD_2555-2024%20App_2249-2024%20anonymized.pdf2024-01-20DE