| 2026-02-27 | UPC_CFI_344/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division (judge-rapporteur Johansson) ordered Defendant 1 (SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd.) to pay a separate court fee for its counterclaim for revocation within 14 days, ruling that the fee already paid by Defendants 2-4 for their earlier counterclaim does not cover Defendant 1's subsequently filed separate counterclaim, even if the content is the same. Failure to pay may result in a default decision under R. 355 RoP. |
| 2026-02-12 | UPC_CFI_575/2025 | Mannheim LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Mannheim Local Division rejected the preliminary objection filed by all seven defendants (led by Sovex Systems and Solvest entities) in Honeywell's infringement action concerning EP 2 563 695 B1. The Court retained jurisdiction over the Dutch defendants under Art. 33(1) UPCA and rejected the defendants' arguments challenging international jurisdiction over Hemtech (Bosnia and Herzegovina) under Art. 31 UPCA and Art. 71b Brussels I Recast. The Court found Honeywell had sufficiently asserted German-directed infringing acts at the pleadings stage, without needing to pre-judge the merits. Leave to appeal the rejection was not granted by the judge-rapporteur. |
| 2026-01-30 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | outcomeName.other | The Mannheim Local Division confirmed the earlier imposition of penalties order of 20 January 2026 against Kodak GmbH and related entities for non-compliance with a final judgment requiring provision of financial and technical information to FUJIFILM Corporation (EP 3 511 174). The Court rejected Kodak's challenge and upheld the maximum daily penalty as justified given the extent and seriousness of the non-compliance. Leave to appeal was granted to develop UPC case law on enforcement measures. |
| 2026-01-13 | UPC_CFI_850/2024 | Mannheim LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a further procedural order in ZTE v. Samsung addressing Samsung's request to produce a licence agreement, granting confidentiality protection under R. 262A RoP and permitting Samsung to file a further pleading on FRAND topics under R. 36 RoP. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_538/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | Sun Patent Trust withdrew its infringement action concerning EP 2 903 267 against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. Defendants 1-4 and 6-8 consented; Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented. No cost compensation was sought. Sun Patent Trust was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_499/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | NEC Corporation withdrew its infringement action against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. All represented defendants consented. Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented but showed no interest in proceedings. No cost compensation was sought. NEC was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_501/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | NEC Corporation withdrew its infringement action concerning EP 3 057 321 against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. All represented defendants consented. Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented. No cost compensation was sought. NEC was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_850/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in ZTE v. Samsung proceedings addressing Samsung's request to produce a licence agreement and requests for further written pleadings under R. 36/263 RoP on FRAND defence, as well as scheduling of an interim conference. |
| 2025-12-18 | UPC_CFI_716/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that Bekaert Combustion Technology B.V. and NV Bekaert SA infringed Polidoro's premixed burner patent EP 2 037 175 and granted an injunction, recall/removal, destruction, information order, interim damages, and publication of the decision. |
| 2025-12-12 | UPC_CFI_766/2025 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division ordered alternative service on Shenzhen Asmax Infinite Technology Co. under the Hague Service Convention after two failed service attempts (rejected by Chinese authorities due to incorrect reference to Hong Kong), applying Art. 15(2) of the Convention. |
| 2025-10-22 | UPC_CFI_575/2025 | Mannheim LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division (judge-rapporteur Marjolein Visser) ruled on a preliminary objection filed by the defendants in an infringement action by Honeywell Control Systems Ltd. concerning EP 2 563 695 B1. The court dismissed the request to transfer the case to The Hague regarding Sovex Systems (D1) and the other Dutch defendants (D2-D6), finding that the Mannheim Local Division has competence under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA based on alleged infringement occurring in Germany. The request to dismiss for lack of international jurisdiction over Hemtech (D7, Bosnia) was also addressed. |
| 2025-10-09 | UPC_CFI_132/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | The Mannheim Local Division dismissed both the infringement action by Total Semiconductor LLC against Texas Instruments entities concerning EP 2 746 967 (DVFS processor) and the counterclaim for revocation, finding no infringement due to insufficiently substantiated assertions and the patent remaining valid. |
| 2025-10-02 | UPC_CFI_162/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | The Mannheim Local Division dismissed Hurom Co. Ltd.'s infringement action against NUC Electronics Co. Ltd. (Korea) concerning EP 2 028 981 (juice extractor), finding no infringement of claim 1 in the separated part of the proceedings. |
| 2025-10-02 | UPC_CFI_159/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that NUC Electronics Europe GmbH and WARMCOOK infringed claim 1 of Hurom Co. Ltd.'s EP 2 028 981 (juice extractor) in Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom, ordering damages to be assessed and full disclosure of infringing sales; costs awarded to Hurom. |
| 2025-10-01 | UPC_CFI_611/2025 | Mannheim LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order on a preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) filed by Grizzly Tools / Lidl entities against Robert Bosch's infringement action, ruling on international and territorial jurisdiction under Brussels Ia Regulation (Art. 71b) and holding that the preliminary objection is an internal procedural tool. |
| 2025-07-23 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division issued an enforcement order imposing penalty payments on Kodak entities for non-compliance with the obligation to destroy infringing embodiments under a prior decision. The Court granted Fujifilm's application for imposition of penalties for each week of non-compliance, while rejecting other enforcement requests. Defendants bear the costs. |
| 2025-06-06 | UPC_CFI_471/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | — | Not infringed | The Mannheim Local Division ruled on the infringement action and revocation counterclaim regarding EP 2 479 680 (adaptive bitrate HTTP streaming). The infringement claim was dismissed as the defendants' systems did not literally or equivalently infringe the patent. The revocation counterclaim was dismissed; the patent was maintained in amended form under Auxiliary Request 12. Infringement costs were borne by the claimants; revocation counterclaim costs were borne by the defendants. Each party bore its own representation costs. The dispute value was set at EUR 20,000,000. |
| 2025-05-28 | UPC_CFI_189/2025 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division set the preliminary value in dispute at EUR 4,000,000 in Samsung Electronics' 5G SEP infringement action against ZTE entities concerning EP 4 050 804, and ordered Samsung to pay an additional advance on fees of EUR 26,000. The court found the initial estimate of EUR 500,000 greatly underestimated the value given that the action attacked all standard-essential 5G mobile devices of ZTE and had economic bearing on the broader FRAND rate dispute between the parties. |
| 2025-05-14 | UPC_CFI_132/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order in infringement action by TOTAL SEMICONDUCTOR against Texas Instruments entities. Decision on Claimant's request for a further written submission under Rules 12.5 and 36 RoP in response to Defendants' rejoinder: final decision partially postponed to the oral hearing; request otherwise rejected. The court found no new arguments by Defendants requiring a response beyond what was already permitted. |
| 2025-05-08 | UPC_CFI_716/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order granting Claimant Polidoro S.p.a. a one-week extension to 19 May 2025 for filing its Reply to the Statement of Defence and Defence to the Counterclaim for Revocation. Extension justified because access to the unredacted version of the Statement of Defence was delayed under Rule 262A RoP. |
| 2025-04-23 | UPC_CFI_471/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Pre-trial procedural order from the Mannheim Local Division in an infringement action concerning EP 2 479 680 (adaptive bitrate streaming), confirming the oral hearing date and identifying key contested issues, including claim construction of the HTTP streaming method claims, direct and equivalent infringement, and the defendant's invalidity counterclaim. The order is preparatory and contains no substantive ruling. |
| 2025-04-02 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, and Kodak Holding GmbH infringed EP 3 511 174 (relating to printing plate technology) owned by FUJIFILM. The defendants were ordered to cease infringement, provide information, destroy infringing products, recall products from commerce, and pay FUJIFILM EUR 300,000 as an interim award on legal costs. The counterclaim for revocation was dismissed. The value of the dispute was set at EUR 15,000,000. |
| 2025-04-02 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division separated and ordered independent proceedings for claims and counterclaims relating to the UK national part of European patent EP 3 511 174, following the ECJ's judgment in C-339/22 (BSH Hausgeräte) regarding UPC's jurisdiction under Brussels Ia Regulation. The Court acted after awaiting the ECJ decision which was delivered after the oral hearing. |
| 2025-03-11 | ACT_17336/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division ordered a separation of proceedings under Rules 302.1, 303.2 and 340.2 RoP, splitting off claims related to Poland, Spain, Turkey, and the UK pending guidance from the ECJ (Case C-339/22) on international jurisdiction under the Brussels Ia Regulation. |
| 2025-03-11 | UPC_CFI_159/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Infringement merits | Infringed | Hurom's patent EP 2 028 981 (slow juicer) was found infringed by NUC Electronics Europe GmbH and WARMCOOK. An injunction was granted covering France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania. Defendants were ordered to pay damages (amount to be determined), provide information, destroy/recall infringing products, and pay EUR 56,000 in interim legal costs. The court also addressed the intertemporal application of UPCA substantive law to acts committed before and after 1 June 2023. Partial dismissal of remaining requests. Value in dispute set at EUR 675,000. |
| 2025-02-06 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Infringed | Procedural order publishing the redacted version of the substantive decision of 22 November 2024 in the infringement action (with FRAND counterclaim and invalidity counterclaim) between Panasonic Holdings Corporation and OPPO/OROPE Germany GmbH. The underlying decision (issued 22 November 2024): patent EP 2 568 724 infringed; injunction, recall, disclosure and provisional damages of EUR 250,000 ordered; invalidity counterclaim and FRAND counterclaim dismissed; defendants to bear costs; value in dispute set at over EUR 50 million. |
| 2025-02-06 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division (Judge-rapporteur Prof. Dr. Tochtermann) published the redacted version of its decision of 22 November 2024 concerning EP 2 568 724 (SEP/FRAND). The decision found infringement by OPPO and OROPE and ordered: (I) a pan-European cease and desist; (II)–(IV) recall and destruction; (V) damages liability from 17 December 2014 (for the predecessor's rights) and from 29 July 2016 (for Panasonic); (VI) EUR 250,000 preliminary damages; (VII) residual infringement claims dismissed. The counterclaim for revocation (B) was dismissed. The FRAND counterclaim (C) was dismissed. Defendants bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| 2025-02-04 | UPC_CFI_218/2023 | Mannheim LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order confirming that Panasonic Holdings Corporation (claimant) and the Xiaomi entities and related defendants had reached a settlement, resulting in the mutual withdrawal of both the infringement action and the defendants' joint counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 3 069 315. Costs were settled by agreement between the parties; no court cost decision was required. |
| 2025-01-30 | UPC_CFI_359/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Pre-trial order of Mannheim Local Division in FUJIFILM v Kodak (EP 3 476 616) setting out preliminary views and questions from the judge-rapporteur in advance of the oral hearing. The order identifies key issues on claim construction, novelty and inventive step (prior art: WO 379, US 952, EP 452, JP 021, EP 408) and directs the parties' attention to specific technical questions requiring focused argument at the hearing. |
| 2025-01-22 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a preparatory procedural order ahead of the oral hearing in a patent infringement action brought by Fujifilm against Kodak entities concerning EP 3 511 174. The order set out preliminary views and questions on contested legal and technical points, including cross-border relief for the UK, interpretation of main vs. subsidiary requests, and claim construction, without making any final substantive ruling. |
| 2024-11-22 | ACT_545551/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that Guangdong OPPO and OROPE Germany infringed Panasonic's EP 2 568 724 (radio communication patent), granted injunction, recall and other relief, while dismissing the invalidity counterclaim and the FRAND counterclaim. |
| 2024-10-20 | UPC_CFI_471/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order on a request for disclosure of information about the configuration and coding scheme of video files (Rule 191 RoP). The court declined to order disclosure at this stage due to the uncertain validity of the patent, finding it would be disproportionate to require defendants to provide the requested technical information before validity is established. |
| 2024-09-16 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Mannheim Local Division scheduling and structuring the oral hearing in a SEP infringement action. The order confirms hearing dates and provides guidance on the structure of oral submissions, seating arrangements, and confidentiality measures. No substantive ruling on the merits. |
| 2024-07-09 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division granted an extension of deadlines for the defendants' submissions on FRAND aspects until 14 August 2024, following the conclusion of confidentiality proceedings. The extension was granted as necessary to allow for complete submissions on FRAND-related material, while taking into account that the parties were already familiar with the documents from parallel national proceedings. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_CFI_218/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued an order in Panasonic Holdings Corporation's infringement action against Xiaomi entities concerning EP 3 096 315, ruling on a production of licence agreements application (R. 190 RoP). The court ordered disclosure of certain licence agreements (with redactions permitted for irrelevant passages) where the parties holding those agreements had not provided valid reasons to refuse consent to production. |
| 2024-02-14 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division established a confidentiality regime in the Panasonic v. OPPO infringement proceedings for the production of licence agreements and confidential commercial information under Rules 190/191, 262, and 262A RoP, setting out a structured multi-step process to protect trade secrets while enabling their use in the proceedings. |
| 2024-02-14 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | German-language version of the Mannheim Local Division order establishing a confidentiality regime (Geheimnisschutzregime) in Panasonic v. OPPO, covering the same rules for the protection of licence agreement contents as trade secrets under Rules 190/191, 262, and 262A RoP. |
| 2023-12-08 | UPC_CFI_219/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order addressing the validity of service of the statement of claim on Xiaomi entities domiciled in China and Hong Kong, with Panasonic Holdings arguing that service at Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH's address was effective for all group companies given their integrated corporate structure. |