Overview · Filed: —
UPC_APP_55795/2024
PROTECTIVE DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MAKING SAID PROTECTIVE DEVICE
OtherPreliminary ObjectionMilan LDPreliminary objection—
This case cites
Authorities cited within the decisions on file for this case.
Court of Justice EU · 3
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article 71a Brussels I Recast | jurisdiction — UPC deemed court of a Member State | Binding | The UPC 'shall be deemed to be a court of a Member State' pursuant the Article 71a of the Regulation (EU) n. 1215/2012 (recast) as amended by Regulation (EU) 542/2014. |
| C-339/2022 | jurisdiction — UPC universal jurisdiction over European patents where defendant domiciled in UPC state | Binding | In light of Court of Justice decision in case C-339/2022, 25 February 2025, UPC Milan Local Division has universal jurisdiction to adjudicate on infringement issues related to European patents over the defendants domiciled in Italy |
| Articles 4(1), 71a, 71b Brussels I Recast | jurisdiction | Binding | pursuant to Articles 4(1) and 71a and 71b of the Regulation (EU) n. 1215/2012 (recast) as amended by Regulation (EU) 542/2014. |
EPC article · 3
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 32 | jurisdiction | Binding | UPC Milan Local Division has universal jurisdiction to adjudicate on infringement issues related to European patents over the defendants domiciled in Italy pursuant to Article 32 UPCA |
| 31 | jurisdiction | Binding | Keywords rule 19 RoP, art. 31 and 34 UPCA, Jurisdiction, Spain |
| 34 | territorial scope — non-UPC validated patents | Binding | Art. 34 UPCA must be interpreted consistently; this rule seems rather only regulate the case in which the EP is not validated in the entire territory of the UPC. |
Rules of Procedure · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | jurisdiction | Binding | Keywords rule 19 RoP, art. 31 and 34 UPCA, Jurisdiction, Spain |
UPC (CFI) · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_CFI_355/2023 | jurisdiction — non-UPC validated patents | Persuasive | see Local Division Düsseldorf, Decision dated 28 January.2025, Fujifilm v Kodak (UPC_CFI_355/2023). |
UPC Court of Appeal · 1
| Target | Legal point | Strength | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPC_CoA_388/2024 | jurisdiction — territorial scope distinguished | Distinguished | This solution is not affected by the CoA decision (UPC_CoA_388/2024, APL_39884/2024), that revoked a preliminary injunction erroneously extended by the First Instance Court (Local Division of the Hague) to Ireland. |
Cited by
Subsequent UPC decisions citing this case.
Not yet cited in another decision in our corpus.