UPC CFI 54/2023

Jun 6, 2023·EP1612910 · On-board power supply monitor and power control system

Case details: Status
Case Closed (No infringement)
Action
Infringement
Category
Main infringement action
Parties: Claimants
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. LimitedOperating co.
Representatives
Florian Oliver Gunther Schmidt-Bogatzky
Florian Schmidtbogatzky
Respondents
Tesla Germany GmbHOperating co.
Representatives
Marcus Grosch-Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
Division: Hamburg LD
Judges: Sabine Klepsch
Stefan Schilling
Walter Schober
Hergen Kapels
Technology: Electrical engineering
Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
Language: German
First decided: Aug 22, 2023
Last decision: Aug 26, 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 found	Median days to first decision
All UPC	53% (62/117)	124
Hamburg LD	Locked	Locked
Judge Sabine Klepsch	Locked	Locked
Judge Stefan Schilling	Locked	Locked
Judge Walter Schober	Locked	Locked
Judge Hergen Kapels	Locked	Locked

At the UPC: Broadcom Group (52 cases)·Tesla Group (25 cases)

Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in

Related cases

All proceedings on this patent

This dispute contains 4 other proceedings

UPC CoA 629/2024·UPC CoA 631/2024·UPC APP 53238/2024·UPC APP 12793/2024

2 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent

UPC CoA 632/2024·CC 577764/2023

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Hamburg LD·2023

Decisions

2024-08-26
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division dismissed Avago's infringement claim against Tesla for EP 1 612 910 B1 (power management system) as no infringement of any claim could be established, and on Tesla's counterclaim partially revoked the patent, maintaining only claim 1 in the form of auxiliary request 1 with claim 3 deleted.
Show the legal issues (3)
- patent claim infringement assessment
- partial revocation counterclaim Art. 65(3) UPCA
- independent claims not building on each other
2023-12-05
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division issued a further procedural order setting deadlines for Avago Technologies to file its reply and response to the invalidity counterclaim, after additional submissions regarding the start date of the reply deadline, in the infringement action against Tesla Germany GmbH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE.
Show the legal issues (2)
- Deadline for reply to defence and invalidity counterclaim
- Start of deadline calculation
2023-11-28
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division issued a procedural order setting the deadline for Avago Technologies to file its reply to the statement of defence and its response to the invalidity counterclaim, taking into account the delayed receipt of the confidential defence version and aligning the two deadlines.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Deadline for reply to defence
- Deadline for response to invalidity counterclaim
- Confidential document access
2023-11-03
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division issued a final confidentiality order under Rule 262A RoP in Avago v. Tesla, defining the scope of protection for trade secrets and the category of persons permitted to access confidential information.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Confidentiality order Rule 262A RoP
- Trade secrets Art. 58 UPCA
- Access restrictions
2023-10-04
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division issued a provisional order restricting access to confidential information under Rule 262A RoP to the parties' legal representatives only, pending a final decision on the confidentiality application, in an infringement action by Avago Technologies against Tesla entities concerning EP 1 612 910.
Show the legal issues (2)
- Confidentiality of business secrets (Rule 262A RoP)
- Provisional access restriction
2023-08-22
Infringement ActionPublic
Summary: The Hamburg Local Division addressed Tesla's request for a deadline extension to file its defence in Avago Technologies' infringement action, in circumstances where key personnel were on holiday and supplier coordination was required.
Show the legal issues (2)
- Deadline extension
- Defence filing deadline

Documents

Show all 246 documents

Document title	Date	Public
Case Closure Formal Check	2025-01-23	Not public
Receipt	2024-12-18	Not public
Zustimmung Rücknahmen	2024-12-17	Not public
Close workflow	2024-12-11	Public
Close workflow	2024-11-19	Public
Anonymisation	2024-09-04	Not public
Headnote-and-Keywords	2024-08-28	Not public
DecisionOutcome	2024-08-26	Not public
Entscheidung	2024-08-26	Not public
Entscheidung	2024-08-26	Public

Plain-English summary

Avago Technologies sued Tesla entities for infringement of EP 1612910 B1 (an on-board power supply monitor and power control system patent) before the Hamburg Local Division. The court dismissed the infringement action in full, finding no infringement of any asserted claim. On Tesla's revocation counterclaim, the patent was partially revoked — maintained only as to claim 1 in the form of auxiliary request 1 with claim 3 deleted — resulting in Avago bearing 85% of costs.

Accepted arguments

What the court agreed with — by party.

EP 1612910 is partially invalid; claim 3 and claims beyond auxiliary request 1 scope should be revoked
RespondentLegal basis: Art. 65(3) UPCA; Art. 138(3) EPC
Note: Hamburg Local Division found patent partially invalid; maintained only claim 1 in auxiliary request 1 form (with claim 3 deleted); independent claims may separately survive if not logically dependent on revoked claims.
No infringement of EP 1612910 by Tesla vehicles' power management systems could be established
Respondent
Note: Court found no infringement of any claim including auxiliary requests 1a and 2; infringement action dismissed in full.

Rejected arguments

What the court did not agree with — and why.

Tesla vehicles infringe EP 1612910 (on-board power supply monitor and power control system)
ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 63 UPCA
Reason: No infringement of claim 1 or any auxiliary claim could be established on the evidence; the specific overvoltage protection solution allegedly used in the attacked embodiment was not shown to be implemented.

Key legal principles

Doctrines and rules cited in the reasoning.

Patent may be partially revoked under Art. 65(3) UPCA such that independent claims surviving in an auxiliary request may be maintained if grounds for revocation do not extend to them Independent claims in a patent are not necessarily tied together; one independent claim may survive while another falls, provided they are not logically part of a closed claim set requiring each other Failure to use CMS workflow does not invalidate a submission if the deadline is still met, particularly in the early phase of UPC operations

Browse other cases on this principle.

Claim construction notes

The Hamburg Local Division construed claim 1 of EP 1612910 (a power control system with monitoring integrated circuit modules). On the counterclaim, the court maintained claim 1 in auxiliary request 1 form (with claim 3 deleted), indicating that the overvoltage protection element of the claim was a key differentiating feature.