UPC CoA 500/2023
Dec 20, 2023·EP3295663 · DIGITALLY OVERLAYING AN IMAGE WITH ANOTHER IMAGE
- Case details
- StatusCase ClosedActionAppealCategoryMain appeal
- Parties
- Claimants
- AIM Sport Development AGOperating co.
Representatives- Johanna Flythström-Roschier
- Mikael Segercrantz-Roschier
- Ari Laakkonen-Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP
- Ralph Nack-Noerr Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB
- Maximilian von Rospatt-rospatt Rechtsanwälte PartGmbB
- Siddharth Kusumakar-Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP
- Niclas Gajeck-Noerr Partnerschaftsgesellschaft mbB
Respondents- Supponor OyOperating co.
- Supponor LimitedOperating co.
- Supponor SASUOperating co.
- Supponor Italia SRLOperating co.
- Supponor España SLOperating co.
Representatives- Henrik Lehment-Hogan Lovells International LLP
- Matthias Sonntag-Gleiss Lutz
- Panu Siitonen-Hannes Snellman
- Division
- Court of Appeal
- Technology
- Electrical engineeringAudio-visual technology
- Language
- English
- First decided
- Feb 26, 2024
- Last decision
- Apr 26, 2024
| Median days to first decision | |
|---|---|
| All UPC | 124 |
| Judge Rian Kalden | Locked |
| Judge Patricia Rombach | Locked |
| Judge Ingeborg Simonsson | Locked |
At the UPC: AIM Sport Development AG (15 cases)·Supponor Group (14 cases)
This dispute contains 8 other proceedings
UPC CFI 403/2025·UPC APP 1211/2025·UPC APP 65722/2024·UPC CoA 489/2023·UPC APP 588407/2023 and 3 more
4 other defendants litigating the same or a related patent
UPC CoA 104/2026·UPC CoA 107/2026·UPC CoA 108/2026·UPC CFI 214/2023
Start a free trial to see how each one ended.
More cases: Court of Appeal·2023
- 2024-04-26
Summary: Court of Appeal (26 April 2024) ruled that AIM Sport Development AG was entitled to the longer appeal period under R. 224.1(a) RoP (2 months) rather than R. 220.1(c) (15 days) for lodging a statement of appeal, because the CFI incorrectly combined infringement and provisional measures proceedings in one decision without distinction, creating an excusable error on AIM's part.
Show the legal issues (4)
- Time limit for lodging statement of appeal (R. 224.1 RoP)
- Excusable error
- Legitimate expectations
- Mixed infringement/provisional measures decision
- 2024-02-26
Summary: The Court of Appeal ruled that AIM Sport's appeal (lodged as APL_596892/2023) against a first-instance decision dismissing the actions due to patent opt-out was filed out of the two-month time limit under R.220.1(c) RoP and was therefore inadmissible.
Show the legal issues (3)
- Admissibility of appeal – time limit (R.220.1(c) RoP)
- Opt-out of European patent
- UPC competence
| Document title | Date | Public |
|---|---|---|
| Outcome of the Order | 2025-02-19 | Not public |
| Order | 2025-02-19 | Public |
| Acknowledgement-of-lodging | 2024-11-13 | Not public |
| Decision-On-Appeal-On-Measures-Outcome | 2024-11-12 | Not public |
| Final Order | 2024-11-12 | Public |
| Hearing Reference | 2024-10-09 | Not public |
| Hearing Reference | 2024-10-09 | Not public |
| interimProcedureClosure | 2024-06-18 | Not public |
| summons | 2024-06-18 | Not public |
| Order on oral hearing | 2024-06-18 | Public |