- Case details
- Status—ActionApplication for costsCategoryCosts assessments
- Parties
- Claimants
- Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.Operating co.
Representatives- Bolko Ehlgen-Linklaters LLP
- Julia Schönbohm-Linklaters LLP
- Dipl.-Phys. 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
- Dusseldorf LD
- Judges
- —
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringSemiconductors
- Language
- —
- First decided
- Apr 9, 2026
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Dusseldorf LD | Locked |
At the UPC: Seoul Semiconductor Group (29 cases)·expert e-Commerce GmbH (14 cases)
This 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: Dusseldorf LD·2025
- 2026-04-09Application For CostsPublic
Summary: The court partially granted the defendants' application for costs assessment (Kostenfestsetzungsantrag) regarding the appeal proceedings. The claimant was ordered to pay the defendants EUR 50,450.52, covering legal and patent attorney fees of EUR 49,407 plus a proportionate share of travel and accommodation costs of EUR 1,043.52. The defendants' claim that the first-instance cost agreement of EUR 100,000 also applied to the appeal was rejected.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Costs assessment (Kostenfestsetzung) under Art. 69 UPCA and R. 150, 151, 152 RoP
- Whether a first-instance cost agreement extends to appeal proceedings
- Reasonableness and proportionality of legal and patent attorney fees
- Allocation of travel and accommodation costs between parallel proceedings
- Entscheidung%20Kostenfestsetzungsantrag_signed-1.pdf2026-04-09DE
The first-instance cost agreement does not cover appeal proceedings; only actually incurred and reasonable costs are recoverable for the appeal
ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 69 UPCA; R. 150, 151, 152 RoPLegal and patent attorney fees of EUR 49,407 are reasonable and within the recoverable ceiling, and were unchallenged by the claimant
RespondentLegal basis: R. 152.1, 152.2 RoPTravel and accommodation costs of EUR 2,087.04 should be split 50% due to a parallel case being heard concurrently by the Court of Appeal
ClaimantLegal basis: R. 151 RoP; proportionality principle
The first-instance cost agreement of EUR 100,000 per side applies equally to the appeal proceedings, entitling defendants to EUR 101,067.47 total
RespondentLegal basis: Art. 69 UPCATravel and accommodation costs amount to EUR 1,067.47 as claimed by the defendants
RespondentLegal basis: R. 151 RoP