View all cases
- Case details
- Status—ActionProcedural applicationCategoryCase management orders
- Parties
- Claimants
- Panasonic Holdings CorporationOperating co.
Representatives- Christof Augenstein-Kather Augenstein
- Jonas Block-Kather Augenstein
- Miriam Kiefer-Kather Augenstein
Respondents- Xiaomi Inc.Operating co.
- Beijing Xiaomi Mobile Software Co. Ltd.Operating co.
- Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbHOperating co.
- Xiaomi Technology France S.A.S.Operating co.
- Xiaomi Technology Italy S.R.L.Operating co.
- Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.Operating co.
- Xiaomi H.K. LimitedOperating co.
- Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd.Operating co.
- Odiporo GmbHOperating co.
- Shamrock Mobile GmbHOperating co.
- Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.Operating co.
- OROPE Germany GmbHOperating co.
Representatives- Henrik Lehment-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Benjamin Schröer-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Tobias J. Hessel-Clifford Chance Partnerschaft mbB
- Steffen Steininger-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Division
- Munich LD
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringTelecommunications · Digital communication
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Feb 25, 2025
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Munich LD | Locked |
| Judge Matthias Zigann | Locked |
| Judge András Kupecz | Locked |
| Judge Tobias Pichlmaier | Locked |
| Judge Kerstin Roselinger | Locked |
At the UPC: Panasonic Group (81 cases)·Xiaomi Group (92 cases)
Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patentThis dispute contains 14 other proceedings
CC 3450/2024·CC 595909/2023·UPC CFI 220/2023·UPC CFI 221/2023·UPC APP 14324/2024 and 9 more
Decisions
- 2025-02-25Application RoP 333Public
Summary: Munich Local Division panel order reviewing (R. 333 RoP) the judge-rapporteur's earlier decision to refund only 40% of court fees following withdrawal of infringement actions and counterclaims (after out-of-court settlement) in patent proceedings by Panasonic Holdings Corporation against Xiaomi entities (UPC_CFI_220/2023) and Guangdong OPPO Mobile (UPC_CFI_221/2023) concerning EP 3 024 163. Panasonic argued a 60% refund was due. The panel confirmed the 40% refund rate, finding the withdrawals occurred after closure of the written procedure (R. 370.9(b)(ii) RoP).
Show the legal issues (3)
- Court fee reimbursement rate upon withdrawal after settlement (R. 370.9(b) RoP)
- Review of judge-rapporteur's order on costs (R. 333 RoP)
- Timing of withdrawal relative to procedural stages
Documents
- A93A7C905EEB94B4D556D072FD0CB71E_de.pdf2025-02-25DE