UPClytics
ENDE
Sign inStart trial
View all cases

UPC CoA 882/2025

Sep 18, 2025·EP3511174 · PLANOGRAPHIC PRINTING PLATE ORIGINAL PLATE, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING PLANOGRAPHIC PRINTING PLATE, AND PLANOGRAPHIC PRINTING METHOD

Follow
Case details
Status
Case Closed
Action
Appeal
Category
Main appeal
Parties
Claimants
Representatives
Respondents
Representatives
Division
Court of Appeal
Judges
Technology
  • Instruments
    Optics
  • Mechanical engineering
    Textile and paper machines
Language
English
First decided
Jun 2, 2026
How this compares
How long the court takes to reach a first decision.
Median days to first decision
All UPC124
Judge Rian KaldenLocked
Judge Patricia RombachLocked
Judge Ingeborg SimonssonLocked
Judge Max TilmannLocked
Judge Lorenzo ParriniLocked

At the UPC: Kodak Group (52 cases)·Fujifilm Group (52 cases)

Start 14-day free trialAlready a user? Sign in
Related cases
All proceedings on this patent

This dispute contains 24 other proceedings

UPC CFI 3254/2026·UPC CFI 3265/2026·UPC CFI 3269/2026·UPC CFI 3173/2026·UPC CoA 130/2026 and 19 more

Start a free trial to see how each one ended.

More cases: Court of Appeal·2025

Decisions
  • 2026-06-02
    Appeal RoP220.1Public

    Summary: The Court of Appeal set aside the first-instance decisions in all four appeals. In UPC_CoA_312/2025 and UPC_CoA_333/2025, Fujifilm's infringement requests were rejected, Fujifilm's unconditional request to amend claim 1 of the German designation was allowed (claim 1 revoked as granted and upheld in amended form), and Kodak's counterclaim for revocation was rejected. In UPC_CoA_880/2025 and UPC_CoA_882/2025, Fujifilm's infringement requests were dismissed, and the condition under which Kodak's counterclaim for revocation was filed was declared not fulfilled.

    Show the legal issues (8)
    • Claim construction of numerical values and manufacturing tolerances
    • Private prior use (Art. 28 UPCA) under German law
    • Front-loaded proceedings and submission of additional evidence (R. 29(c) RoP)
    • International jurisdiction of the UPC over non-UPC territory designations (Art. 34 UPCA)
    • Application of Brussels I bis Regulation (Art. 4) and forum non conveniens
    • Application of comity principles in cross-border patent disputes
    • Patent amendment in appeal proceedings
    • Unconditional request to amend claim 1
Documents
Document titleDatePublic
Other Documents2026-08-03Not public
Order2026-07-27Not public
Order2026-07-27Public
Case closed2026-06-03Not public
Decision2026-06-02Not public
Decision2026-06-02Public
Decision2026-06-02Not public
Decision2026-06-02Not public
Decision2026-06-02Not public
Decision2026-06-02Not public
Communication2026-06-01Not public
Oral procedure closed2026-04-01Not public
Order2026-03-31Public
Order2026-03-31Public
Hearing recording reference document2026-03-30Not public
Oral procedure opened2026-03-24Not public
Interim procedure closed2026-03-24Not public
Communication2026-03-24Not public
Receipt2026-03-23Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-23Not public
Document Respondent2026-03-23Not public
Communication2026-03-18Not public
Order2026-03-18Not public
Order2026-03-18Public
Receipt2026-03-17Not public
Cover sheet2026-03-17Not public
Other document Appellant2026-03-17Not public
Interim procedure opened2026-02-26Not public
Written procedure closed2026-02-26Not public
Communication2026-02-25Not public
Receipt2026-02-25Not public
Cover sheet2026-02-25Not public
Statement of Response2026-02-25Not public
Statement of Response2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Exhibit Respondent2026-02-25Not public
Order2025-12-22Not public
Order2025-12-22Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-15Not public
Other document Respondent2025-12-15Not public
Receipt2025-12-15Not public
Order2025-12-11Not public
Order2025-12-11Not public
Other document Appellant2025-12-10Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-10Not public
Other document Appellant2025-12-10Not public
Receipt2025-12-10Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-10Not public
Other document Respondent2025-12-10Not public
Receipt2025-12-10Not public
Order2025-12-08Not public
Order2025-12-08Public
Order2025-12-04Not public
Order2025-12-04Public
Other document Respondent2025-12-02Not public
Cover sheet2025-12-02Not public
Receipt2025-12-02Not public
Order2025-11-25Not public
Order2025-11-25Public
Cover sheet2025-11-20Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-20Not public
Receipt2025-11-20Not public
Communication2025-11-20Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Statement of the Grounds of Appeal2025-11-18Not public
Cover sheet2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Other document Appellant2025-11-18Not public
Receipt2025-11-18Not public
Summons to oral hearing2025-10-21Not public
Summons2025-10-21Public
Order2025-10-21Not public
Order2025-10-21Public
Publication2025-10-21Not public
Other document Appellant2025-10-21Not public
Communication2025-10-13Not public
Acknowledgement-of-lodging2025-09-18Not public
25-09-18_-_EP_174_-_Appeal_-_Kodak_v_Fuji_UK2025-09-18Not public
Accepted arguments
What the court agreed with — by party.

  • Fujifilm's unconditional request to amend claim 1 of the German designation of the patent should be allowed

    ClaimantLegal basis: Art. 76 UPCA; amendment proceedings

  • Kodak's counterclaim for revocation of the amended claim should be rejected

    RespondentLegal basis: Revocation counterclaim

  • UPC has international jurisdiction over designations outside the UPC territory where the defendant is domiciled in the UPC territory under Art. 4 Brussels I bis

    RespondentLegal basis: Art. 4 Brussels I bis; Art. 34 UPCA; CJEU Owusu C-281/02; CJEU BSH v Electrolux
Rejected arguments
What the court did not agree with — and why.

  • Fujifilm's infringement requests based on the patent as granted

    ClaimantLegal basis: Patent infringement (EP3511174 as granted)

  • The court should decline jurisdiction on forum non conveniens grounds

    ClaimantLegal basis: Forum non conveniens doctrine