UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CFI 241/2023

Jul 13, 2023·EP2145848 · False twist texturing machine

Action number: ACT 549585/2023

Case details
Status
Case Closed (Patent infringed)
Action
Infringement
Category
Main infringement action
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
  • Stefania Bergia
  • Giulio E. Sironi
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Milan LD
Technology
  • Mechanical engineering
    Handling · Textile and paper machines
Language
Italian
First decided
Jul 21, 2023
Last decision
Jun 6, 2024
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.
Infringement foundMedian days to first decision
All UPC53% (62/117)124
Milan LDLockedLocked
Judge Pierluigi PerrottiLockedLocked
Judge Alima ZanaLockedLocked
Judge Carine GilletLockedLocked

At the UPC: Oerlikon Textile GmbH & CO KG (13 cases)·Bhagat Textile Engineers (6 cases)

This dispute contains 6 other proceedings

UPC APP 3348/2025·UPC CoA 12/2025·UPC CoA 8/2025·UPC CFI 761/2024·UPC APP 21554/2024 and 1 more

2 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

CC 596263/2023·UPC CFI 240/2023

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Milan LD·2023

Decisions
  • 2025-05-09

    Summary: The Milan Local Division issued a costs decision pursuant to Rule 156 RoP following a prior merits judgment (ORD_598484/2023) in favour of Oerlikon Textile against Bhagat Textile Engineers for infringement of EP 2 145 848. The court awarded Oerlikon EUR 80,000 in recoverable representation costs (EUR 65,000 for the main action and EUR 15,000 for the preservation of evidence proceedings), reduced from the claimed EUR 120,425.28, on the basis that the case was relatively straightforward with no validity or infringement dispute by the defendant.

    Show the legal issues (4)
    • Costs decision (R. 156 RoP)
    • Proportionality of recoverable costs (Art. 69-70 UPCA; R. 150-157 RoP)
    • Cost ceiling application
    • Simple case reduction of costs
  • 2024-11-04
    Infringement ActionPublic

    Summary: Decision on the merits by the Milan Local Division (full panel) in an infringement action by Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co KG against Bhagat Textile Engineers (India) concerning a texturing/structuring machine exhibited at ITMA 2023. The defendant did not contest infringement or validity. The court refused to stay proceedings pending parallel revocation proceedings against the same patent by a different defendant. The court granted a permanent injunction prohibiting sale and promotion of the infringing machine in Italy and Germany, imposed a penalty of EUR 12,000 per breach payable to the court, awarded provisional damages of EUR 15,000, set the case value at EUR 750,000, and ordered Bhagat to bear 80% of costs (with 20% offset for Oerlikon's behavior during settlement negotiations).

    Show the legal issues (5)
    • Refusal to stay infringement proceedings pending parallel revocation (Rule 295(m) RoP)
    • Discretionary permanent injunction under Art. 63(1) UPCA
    • Burden of proof regarding risk of repetition of infringement
    • Provisional damages
    • Costs apportionment and partial offset under Art. 69(2) UPCA
  • 2024-06-06
    Infringement ActionPublic

    Summary: Procedural order in infringement proceedings by Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co. KG against Bhagat Textile Engineers (Milan Local Division). The judge-rapporteur set the provisional value of the case at EUR 750,000 for purposes of recoverable costs ceiling. Access to expert report obtained via preservation-of-evidence order was granted to both parties. Deadlines were set for submission of additional documents and a case summary ahead of the oral hearing scheduled for 27 September 2024.

    Show the legal issues (3)
    • Value of the action for recoverable costs ceiling
    • Access to evidence from pre-trial preservation order (Art. 60 UPCA)
    • R. 119 RoP penalty request
  • 2024-05-14

    Summary: Procedural order (in Italian) requiring parties to submit a summary of issues to be addressed at the forthcoming Interim Conference and to notify the court of attendees' names and capacities. The order also addressed the balance between the transparency principle and the right to protect confidential information, particularly regarding costs information in a case where a settlement may have been under discussion.

    Show the legal issues (3)
    • Transparency vs. confidentiality (Rule 262A RoP)
    • Preparation for Interim Conference (Rules 103, 105, 106 RoP)
    • Confidentiality of cost-related information
  • 2023-07-21
    Infringement ActionPublic

    Summary: The Milan Local Division ordered service of the Statement of Claim on defendants without transmitting the approximately 2,000 pages of exhibits, with the claimant's consent.

    Show the legal issues (2)
    • Service without exhibits
    • Procedural efficiency
Document titleDatePublic
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-02-26Not public
APPLICATION TO CHANGE ELECTRONIC ADDRESS FOR SERVICE2025-02-26Not public
Receipt2025-01-07Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-01-06Not public
Application for change of electronic address for service2025-01-06Not public
Acknowledgement-of-change-of-a-representative2025-01-06Not public
Application-RoP293-Receipt2025-01-06Not public
Formal-checks_Notification-of-positive-outcome2025-01-06Not public
Application for stay2025-01-06Not public
Application-RoP2932024-12-19Not public
Plain-English summary

Oerlikon Textile brought a UPC infringement action against Indian manufacturer Bhagat Textile Engineers for exhibiting a texturing/structuring machine at the ITMA 2023 fair in Milan in infringement of EP 2145848. Bhagat did not contest infringement or validity; the court's decision focused on whether to grant a permanent injunction, the penalty, and costs allocation. The Milan Local Division granted a permanent injunction in Italy and Germany, a EUR 12,000-per-breach court penalty, and EUR 15,000 in provisional damages, with Bhagat bearing 80% of costs due to a 20% equity offset reflecting Oerlikon's increasingly expansive settlement demands.

Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.
  • Infringement of EP 2145848 by exhibiting texturing machine at ITMA 2023 trade fair

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 63(1) UPCA

    Note: Defendant did not contest infringement; the court found infringement established for Italy and Germany.

  • Risk of repetition sufficient to justify permanent injunction given defendant's prior conduct

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 63(1) UPCA

    Note: Court granted permanent injunction; defendant had burden to prove no risk of repetition for already-ascertained infringing conduct.

Rejected arguments
What the court did not agree with — and why.
  • Stay of proceedings pending revocation counterclaim by different defendant in parallel action

    RespondentLegal basis: Rule 295(m) RoP

    Reason: No basis to stay infringement proceedings where defendant has unconditionally conceded validity and infringement; Rule 295(m) stay discretion does not extend to such circumstances.

  • Full costs offset in Oerlikon's favour should be denied due to Oerlikon expanding settlement demands during negotiations

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 69(1)(2) UPCA

    Reason: Court granted only a 20% partial offset, not total offset, recognising Bhagat's cooperative behaviour and Oerlikon's escalating demands as equity factors under Art. 69(1) UPCA.