View all cases
UPC CFI 2022/2025
Jun 17, 2025·EP3346616 SEP · METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BEAM MANAGEMENT IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
- Case details
- StatusInterim PhaseActionCounterclaim for revocationCategoryCounterclaim for revocation
- Parties
- Claimants
- Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd.Operating co.
- OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.Operating co.
- Realme Chongqing Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd.Operating co.
- OROPE Germany GmbHOperating co.
- OTECH Germany GmbHOperating co.
- Oleading B.V.Operating co.
- Reflection Investment B.V.Operating co.
- OTECH Italia S.r.l.Operating co.
- Realme Germany GmbHOperating co.
Representatives- Gisbert Hohagen-Taylor Wessing
Respondents- ASUS Technology Licensing Inc.Operating co.
Representatives- Isabelle Schaller-EIP Europe LLP
- Christof Höhne-EIP Europe LLP
- Sebastian Fuchs-EIP Europe LLP
- Dimitri Kosenko-EIP Europe LLP
- Maximilian Häger-EIP Europe LLP
- Jerome Spaargaren-EIP Europe LLP
- James Seymour-EIP Europe LLP
- Neil Condon-EIP Europe LLP
- Darren Smyth-EIP Europe LLP
- Joanne Welch-EIP Europe LLP
- Marina Wehler-Arnold Ruess
- Arno Riße-Arnold Ruess
- Lisa Rieth-Arnold Ruess
- Victoria Thüsing-Arnold Ruess
- Division
- Munich LD
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringTelecommunications · Digital communication
- Language
- English
- First decided
- Jun 26, 2026
How this compares
The court's record for this kind of case, counted in first-instance rulings. A figure in brackets is the number of rulings a rate rests on.
| Patent revoked | Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|---|
| All UPC | 37% (34/91) | 124 |
| Munich LD | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Matthias Zigann | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Petri Rinkinen | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Tobias Pichlmaier | Locked | Locked |
| Judge Kristian Jauregui Urbahn | — | Locked |
At the UPC: OPPO Group (57 cases)·Asus Group (46 cases)
Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patentThis dispute contains 1 other proceedings
1 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
Decisions
- 2026-06-26Counterclaim for revocationPublic
Summary: The judge-rapporteur confirmed that OPPO's Reply to the Counterclaim for revocation was filed in due time, despite having been submitted only to the infringement proceedings workflow (UPC_CFI_525/2025) and not to the counterclaim revocation workflow (UPC_CFI_2022/2025). The court held that because the content was available to both the court and ASUS in due time, the later upload to the revocation workflow was merely a technical correction and the time limit had been duly complied with.
Show the legal issues (4)
- R. 9 RoP application
- timely filing of reply to counterclaim for revocation
- CMS workflow filing error
- duplicate submission to parallel workflow
Documents
Show all 140 documents| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| Order | 2026-10-16 | Not public |
| Order | 2026-10-16 | Not public |
| Hearing recording reference document | 2026-10-14 | Not public |
| Interim procedure opened | 2026-10-13 | Not public |
| Written procedure closed | 2026-10-13 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-10-12 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-10-12 | Not public |
| Document | 2026-10-12 | Not public |
| Receipt | 2026-10-09 | Not public |
| Cover sheet | 2026-10-09 | Not public |