View all cases
- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryOther procedural
- Parties
- Claimants
- SodaStream Industries Ltd.Operating co.
Representatives- Andreas von Falck-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Alexander Klicznik-Hogan Lovells International LLP
Respondents- Aarke ABOperating co.
Representatives- Jens Olsson-Gulliksson
- Magnus Dahlman-Gulliksson
- Emelie Rexelius-Gulliksson
- Division
- Dusseldorf LD
- Technology
- ChemistryChemical engineering
- Mechanical engineeringHandling
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Oct 10, 2024
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Dusseldorf LD | Locked |
| Judge Berenice Thom | Locked |
| Judge András Kupecz | Locked |
At the UPC: SodaStream Industries Ltd. (7 cases)·Aarke AB (6 cases)
Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patentThis dispute contains 5 other proceedings
UPC CoA 844/2024·UPC CFI 759/2024·UPC CoA 548/2024·UPC CFI 373/2023·UPC APP 47922/2024
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: Dusseldorf LD·2024
Decisions
- 2024-10-10
Summary: Order of the Düsseldorf Local Division refusing Aarke AB's request to adjourn the oral hearing in the infringement action by SodaStream Industries Ltd. concerning EP 1 793 917. The defendant sought adjournment pending an outstanding Court of Appeal order on its dismissed security for costs application. The Court found no convincing reasons to adjourn.
Show the legal issues (2)
- Adjournment of oral hearing Rule 336 RoP
- Security for costs pending appeal
Documents
- 511F53BC9355A02034471B7E2CE4462D_en.pdf2024-10-10EN