UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CFI 539/2024

Sep 24, 2024·EP3212356 · SHAPED SAW WIRE WITH CONTROLLED CURVATURE AT BENDS

Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Generic
Category
Evidence and inspection
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Dusseldorf LD
Technology
  • Mechanical engineering
    Machine tools · Other special machines
Language
German
First decided
Nov 19, 2025
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
Median days to first decision
All UPC124
Dusseldorf LDLocked
Judge Ronny ThomasLocked
Judge Berenice ThomLocked
Judge Tatyana ZhilovaLocked

At the UPC: Bekaert Binjiang Steel Cord Co., Ltd (3 cases)·Siltronic AG (2 cases)

This dispute contains 1 other proceedings

UPC CFI 2102/2025

2 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

UPC CFI 1025/2026·UPC CFI 2098/2025

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Dusseldorf LD·2024

Decisions
  • 2025-11-19
    Application RoP262APublic

    Summary: The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on the partial release of an expert inspection report to Bekaert Binjiang (claimant), ordering redaction of trade secrets (prices, quantities, customer bank details) that were irrelevant to the infringement question, while authorising disclosure of technically relevant information such as wire coating characteristics.

    Show the legal issues (3)
    • R. 262A RoP release of expert inspection report
    • Art. 58 UPCA trade secrets and confidential information
    • Proportionate disclosure - prices, quantities, bank details vs. technical data
  • 2025-04-16
    Request to review an order ex-partePublic

    Summary: The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on Siltronic AG's application for review of an ex parte preservation of evidence and inspection order (R. 197.3 and .4 RoP) obtained by Bekaert Binjiang Steel Cord Co. against Siltronic AG and Hinterberger GmbH & Co. KG concerning EP 3 212 356 B1. The court confirmed that a preservation order may encompass the seizure of delivery notes and invoices, that the list in R. 196.1 is not exhaustive, and that such measures may be used to gather evidence of individual acts of use. The court upheld the order in substance.

    Show the legal issues (4)
    • Review of preservation of evidence and inspection order (R. 197.3-4 RoP)
    • Scope of preservation order – non-exhaustive list in R. 196.1 RoP
    • Seizure of invoices and delivery notes
    • Evidence of individual acts of infringement (Art. 25 UPCA)
Document titleDatePublic
Cover sheet2025-11-25Not public
Application document Claimant2025-11-25Not public
Exhibit document Claimant2025-11-25Not public
Exhibit document Claimant2025-11-25Not public
Exhibit document Claimant2025-11-25Not public
Receipt2025-11-25Not public
Order2025-11-24Not public
Order2025-11-24Not public
Cover sheet2025-11-21Not public
Application document Claimant2025-11-21Not public