UPC Analytics
ENDE
Overview · Filed: —

UPC_CFI_361/2025

DETERMINISTIC UE BEHAVIOUR FOR CSI/SRS REPORTING DURING DRX

InfringementMain Infringement ActionParis LDInfringement Action—
OverviewDecisionsReasoningCitationsDocumentsTimeline
Parties

Claimants

  • Sun Patent Trust
Reps: Sabine Agé

Respondents

  • Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia SL
  • Vivo Tech GmbH
  • Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd.
Reps: Georg Andreas Rauh
Judges

French-seated division — individual judges anonymized.

  • Panel member (anonymized)Presiding Judge / Judge-Rapporteur
  • Panel member (anonymized)Legally Qualified Judge
  • Panel member (anonymized)Legally Qualified Judge
Patents
  • EP 3 852 468SEP · 5G NR
CPC codes: H04W24/10, H04W76/28, H04L5/0051, H04W16/14, H04W72/0446, H04L5/0057, Y02D30/70, H04W72/21, H04W72/23

Technology area: Telecoms · 5G/NR

Sector: Telecommunications

Outcome
DismissedProcedural only (no substantive ruling yet)
Filed: —
First decided: Oct 30, 2025
Language: —

The Paris Local Division (full panel: Lignieres, Kupecz, Gillet) rejected Vivo's preliminary objection challenging UPC jurisdiction and the internal competence of the Paris Local Division in Sun Patent Trust's SEP/FRAND infringement action concerning EP 3 852 468. The Court held that UPC jurisdiction is established under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA because an allegedly infringing Vivo product was offered and delivered to a French customer via Fnac.com, constituting a harmful event in France. Vivo's additional argument that only a FRAND defence (not a FRAND main claim) falls within UPC jurisdiction was deferred to the main proceedings under R. 20.2 RoP.