UPClytics
EnglishDeutsch
Sign inSign up
View all cases

UPC CFI 1141/2025

Oct 13, 2025·EP2805639: Reel based lacing system

Case details
Status
Written Phase
Action
Infringement
Category
Main Infringement Action
Parties
Claimants
Reps: Benjamin Grzimek (Kather Augenstein); Julien Thom (Kather Augenstein); Florence Codevelle (Kather Augenstein); Jörn Peters (Kather Augenstein)
Respondents
Reps: Martin Köhler (Hoyngrokh); Mirko Weinert (Hoyngrokh); Andreas Pfund (Dreiss Patentanwälte); Johannes Maurer (Dreiss Patentanwälte)
Division
Dusseldorf LD
Judges
Technology
Consumer Goods · Footwear Closures · Packaging & Conveying
Language
English
First decided
Jun 1, 2026
Decisions
  • 2026-06-01
    Infringement Action

    The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed the Defendants' application for security for costs under R.158 RoP / Art.69(4) UPCA. The Court found that only the Claimant's own financial situation is relevant, not that of its holding company (CODI), and concluded there was no sufficient basis to find the Claimant lacked means to satisfy a future costs order.

    Legal issues:security for costs under R.158 RoP and Art.69(4) UPCArelevance of holding company financial situation to claimant's meansassessment of claimant's financial sufficiency to meet a future costs order
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
action.issueOrder.order2026-06-01Not public
Order2026-06-01Public
Receipt2026-05-15Not public
Cover sheet2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Exhibit Claimant2026-05-15Not public
Statement of reply2026-05-15Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-05-06Not public
Order2026-05-06Not public
Other Documents2026-05-06Not public
Other Documents2026-05-06Not public
Receipt2026-05-05Not public
Cover sheet2026-05-05Not public
Document Claimant2026-05-05Not public
action.phaseChange.writtenPhaseReopen2026-05-04Not public
Receipt2026-05-04Not public
Cover sheet2026-05-04Not public
Document Defendant2026-05-04Not public
action.communication.general2026-04-30Not public
Receipt2026-04-30Not public
Cover sheet2026-04-30Not public
Application document Claimant2026-04-30Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-25Not public
Order2026-03-25Public
Receipt2026-03-19Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-19Not public
Submission Claimant2026-03-19Not public
Receipt2026-03-17Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-17Not public
Submission Defendant2026-03-17Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-03-06Not public
Order2026-03-06Not public
Service Receipt/Service Document2026-03-05Not public
Receipt2026-02-27Not public
Cover sheet2026-02-27Not public
Document Defendant2026-02-27Not public
Counterclaim for revocation2026-02-27Not public
Statement of defence2026-02-27Not public
Statement of defence2026-02-27Not public
Further pleadings2026-02-27Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
Exhibit Defendant2026-02-26Not public
action.issueOrder.order2026-01-15Not public
Order2026-01-15Not public
Receipt2026-01-05Not public
Cover sheet2026-01-05Not public
Further pleadings2026-01-05Not public
Receipt2026-01-02Not public
Cover sheet2026-01-02Not public
Document2026-01-02Not public
action.communication.general2025-12-29Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-16Not public
Further pleadings2025-12-16Not public
Exhibit document Claimant2025-12-16Not public
Exhibit document Claimant2025-12-16Not public
Receipt2025-12-16Not public
action.communication.general2025-12-02Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-01Not public
Application document Defendant2025-12-01Not public
Receipt2025-12-01Not public
action.publishOrderDecision.case2025-11-06Not public
Service Receipt/Service Document2025-11-06Not public
Other Documents2025-10-29Not public
Other Documents2025-10-29Not public
Cover sheet2025-10-13Not public
Fee2025-10-13Not public
Statement of claim2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Exhibit2025-10-13Not public
Receipt2025-10-13Not public
Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Only the Claimant's own financial situation is relevant for the security-for-costs assessment; the financial situation of the holding company CODI is not a party and need not be considered

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art.69(4) UPCA; UPC CoA Order 29 November 2024, UPC_CFI_548/2024 (Aarke v. Sodastream) §21

  • The stock-price drop of CODI was caused by an internal investigation into a separate subsidiary (Lugano Holding Inc.) and the financial analysis cited by Defendants was outdated; the most recent analysis (17 March 2026) showed CODI earned USD 64.3 million in Q4 2025

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art.69(4) UPCA
Rejected arguments
What the court did not agree with — and why.

  • Defendants' claim that CODI's severe financial state (stock price down 62% in 2025, negative 2026 growth estimates, risk of increased cash extraction from Claimant) gave legitimate concern that a future costs order would be irrecoverable

    RespondentLegal basis: Art.82(2) UPCA; R.158 RoP; UPC CoA Order 18 February 2026, UPC_CoA_890/2025 (Syntorr v. Arthex) §19