UPClytics
View all cases

UPC CoA 570/2024

Oct 1, 2024·EP2671173 · METHOD AND MEANS FOR BROWSING BY WALKING

Case details
Status
Case Closed (Claim dismissed)
Action
Appeal
Category
Main appeal
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Court of Appeal
Technology
  • Electrical engineering
    Telecommunications · Digital communication · Computer technology
Language
English
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
Median days to first decision
All UPC124
Judge Emmanuel GougéLocked

At the UPC: Microsoft Group (34 cases)·Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy (29 cases)

Decisions
  • 2024-10-15
    Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3)Public

    Summary: Court of Appeal dismissed Microsoft's request for discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP) of the Paris Central Division's order refusing to declare Suinno's infringement action manifestly inadmissible under Rule 361 RoP on account of alleged lack of independence of Suinno's representative. The CoA held that the manifestly inadmissible threshold under Rule 361 RoP requires clear-cut cases without in-depth analysis, and that the CFI's refusal to find manifest inadmissibility was not an appropriate case for discretionary review.

    Show the legal issues (4)
    • Discretionary review under Rule 220.3 RoP
    • Manifest inadmissibility under Rule 361 RoP
    • Independence of UPC representative under Art. 48(5) UPCA
    • Managing director/shareholder as representative
Document titleDatePublic
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2024-10-15Not public
Headnote-and-Keywords2024-10-15Not public
Outcome of the Order2024-10-15Not public
Order R 220.32024-10-15Public
Panel-Appointment2024-10-02Not public
BP022024-10-01Not public
BP03a2024-10-01Not public
Application2024-10-01Not public
BP032024-10-01Not public
BP12024-10-01Not public