UPC Analytics
ENDE

Decisions

DateCaseDivisionActionMotionOutcomeSummary
2026-02-11UPC_CFI_1648/2025Dusseldorf LDApplication Rop 265ProceduralSettledThe Düsseldorf Local Division accepted the withdrawal of Avago Technologies' infringement action against Telefónica Germany concerning EP 1 954 091, noting the parties had reached an out-of-court agreement rendering a cost decision unnecessary.
2026-01-26UPC_CFI_1064/2025Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyOrder of the President of the Court of First Instance granting Nordmeccanica's application under R.323 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English. The court held that when the balance of interests is equal, the defendant's position is decisive, and that Nordmeccanica (an Italian company) would be disadvantaged by proceedings in German. The language was changed to English.
2026-01-20UPC_CFI_1506/2025Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyOrder of the President of the Court of First Instance granting Pinterest's application under R.323 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English. The court held that although Pinterest Germany is based in Germany, the working language of the entire Pinterest group is English, and the need for coordinated internal communication outweighed the claimant's interest in German proceedings.
2025-12-10UPC_CFI_316/2024Dusseldorf LDCounterclaim for revocationRevocation meritsInfringedThe Düsseldorf Local Division found indirect infringement of EP 2 061 575 B1 by Altech Makina and granted an injunction with removal from channels of commerce, while dismissing the revocation counterclaim; the infringement action was otherwise dismissed in part, with claimant bearing 30% and defendant 70% of costs.
2025-12-04UPC_CFI_307/2025Dusseldorf LDGeneric OrderProceduralProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in the Aesculap v. Shanghai Bojin medical instrument case, scheduling the oral hearing and addressing requests for claim extension (R. 263), addition of a party (R. 305), and reinstatement in prior status (R. 320).
2025-11-19UPC_CFI_87/2025Dusseldorf LDGeneric OrderProceduralProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on InterDigital's application for a further round of written pleadings under R. 36 RoP against Disney entities in a video streaming patent case concerning EP 2 449 782.
2025-11-03UPC_CFI_662/2025Mannheim LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsDismissedThe Mannheim Local Division rejected the preliminary objection (R.19 RoP) filed by multiple Geely group defendants challenging the jurisdiction and competence of the Mannheim Local Division. The Court found it had jurisdiction under Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA over all defendants as they are members of the same corporate group, share business relations as required, and face the same infringement allegation regarding the same patent claim. The Court also established that the requirement of a 'business relationship' under Art.33(1)(b) UPCA does not require complete identity of infringing acts but merely that the accused acts are aligned in purpose. The infringement action on the merits continues.
2025-10-29UPC_CFI_743/2025Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyOrder of the President of the Court of First Instance granting Skechers' application under R.323 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English. The court held that all Skechers subsidiaries except one are based outside Germany, that the group's internal working language is English, and that conditions of enforcement of any future judgment were of lesser relevance than the parties' coordination needs during proceedings.
2025-10-15UPC_CFI_247/2025Mannheim LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsWithdrawnHuawei Technologies Co. Ltd. withdrew its infringement action against MediaTek Inc. and MediaTek Germany GmbH, and MediaTek Germany GmbH also withdrew its counterclaim for revocation, both with mutual consent, before the close of the written procedure. Neither party sought costs. Both Huawei and MediaTek Germany were each ordered a partial reimbursement of court fees (60%) under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP.
2025-10-02UPC_CFI_496/2025Dusseldorf LDGeneric OrderProceduralProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a rectification order correcting a clerical error in the decision of 29 September 2025 in the Headwater v Samsung proceedings concerning EP 3 110 072.
2025-09-29UPC_CFI_496/2025Dusseldorf LDApplication Rop 265ProceduralWithdrawnThe Düsseldorf Local Division recorded Headwater Research LLC's withdrawal of its infringement action against Samsung Electronics entities concerning EP 3 110 072, with 60% of court fees reimbursed as the withdrawal occurred before closure of the written procedure.
2025-08-22UPC_CFI_248/2024Munich LDInfringement ActionPatent amendedMunich Local Division found infringement of EP 2 387 547 (water filter cartridge patent) in an amended form and issued a permanent injunction against the defendants (AQUASHIELD entities). The patent was maintained in an amended form pursuant to auxiliary requests. The Court also ordered disclosure of information and declared defendants liable for damages from 23 May 2019. The infringement claim was partly dismissed and costs split 50/50.
2025-05-02UPC_CFI_86/2025Mannheim LDGeneric applicationProcedural onlyOrder from the President of the Court of First Instance dated 2 May 2025, under R. 323 RoP, changing the language of proceedings in Mannheim Local Division case UPC_CFI_86/2025 to the language of the patent (as applied for by The Walt Disney Company entities as defendants). The order sets out principles on language change: the possibility of changing to the patent language does not conflict with the claimant's initial choice; the defendant's position is decisive when the balancing of interests is equal; and since the claimant has flexibility in choosing where to file, the language of the patent is generally not unfair to the claimant.
2025-01-27UPC_CFI_244/2024Munich LDGeneric OrderProcedural onlyThe Munich Local Division ordered a small company (claimant in infringement proceedings, Snowpixie Co., Ltd.) to provide security for costs under Rule 158 RoP based on its operating losses and insufficient assets. The court reduced the security amount to reflect equity principles ensuring effective access to justice. The court also denied legal aid (Prozesskostenhilfe) to the claimant, finding it had sufficient resources given it was supported by a litigation funder.
2025-01-27UPC_CFI_244/2024Munich LDGeneric OrderProcedural onlyProcedural order requiring SnowPixie Co., Ltd. (defendant/applicant) to provide security for costs pursuant to Rule 158 RoP, in an amount below the EUR 260,000 demanded by the opposing party (claimant), taking into account SnowPixie's status as a small enterprise and equity considerations. The application for legal aid (Prozesskostenhilfe) was rejected.
2025-01-16UPC_CFI_33/2024Vienna LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsInfringedVienna Local Division found that Strabag Infrastructure & Safety Solutions GmbH infringed SWARCO FUTURIT's European Patent EP 2 643 717. The Court granted an injunction, recall of infringing products from distribution channels, provision of information and destruction of infringing products. Damages were referred to a separate assessment procedure. A validity defence was not considered as no counterclaim for revocation was filed. SWARCO's request to publish the judgment was rejected; Strabag and the intervener were ordered to bear costs.
2024-10-11UPC_CFI_193/2024Munich LDGeneric OrderInfringedDefault judgment granted against ARCORA International GmbH for infringement of EP 3 760 094 B1 (floor cleaning device patent). ARCORA was ordered to cease and desist from offering and placing the infringing product on the market, and to provide accounting information. Partial withdrawal of claims permitted. ARCORA bears 90% of costs, i-mop 10%.
2024-10-10UPC_CFI_483/2023Dusseldorf LDInfringement ActionRevokedDüsseldorf Local Division revoked EP 3 223 320 for Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands based on the counterclaim for revocation, finding the patent was invalid due to added matter (Art. 138(1)(c) EPC / Art. 123(2) EPC). The infringement action was dismissed as a result. Seoul Viosys (claimant) was ordered to bear all costs.
2024-09-11UPC_CFI_127/2024Munich LDGeneric applicationProcedural onlyMunich Local Division ordered correction of party designations under R.305 RoP by analogy. The Court corrected the names and addresses of defendants 3 and 5 following identification that one defendant did not exist at its stated address and another was incorrectly named. The Registry was instructed to re-serve the statement of claim on the corrected defendant 5.
2024-07-12UPC_CFI_363/2023Dusseldorf LDGeneric applicationmotionName.jurisdictionalProcedural onlyProcedural order on a request for court-provided simultaneous interpretation. The court held that where a party's representatives master one of the permitted languages of the local division, court-provided interpretation is not available merely because the claimant chose a different permitted language in which those representatives are less proficient. The party may arrange its own interpreter at its own cost.
2024-07-11UPC_CFI_181/2023Munich LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsSettledThe Munich Local Division confirmed the withdrawal of KraussMaffei Extrusion GmbH's infringement action against Troester GmbH & Co. KG concerning EP 3 221 117, following an out-of-court settlement reached by the parties after the oral hearing of 16 April 2024. The court also ordered partial reimbursement of court fees.
2024-01-23UPC_CFI_181/2023Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Munich Local Division issued a post-interim-conference order in KraussMaffei v. TROESTER, confirming the oral hearing date of 16 April 2024, setting final pleading deadlines, fixing the value of the proceedings at EUR 2 million, and inviting parties to submit preliminary cost estimates.
2023-12-27UPC_CFI_181/2023Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Munich Local Division issued a procedural order in the KraussMaffei v. TROESTER infringement case, establishing rules for the protection of confidential information under Rules 262 and 262A RoP, clarifying that confidentiality applications must be made at the time of initial filing or within 14 days, and that in exceptional circumstances protection may be granted via Rule 9 workflow.
2023-12-04UPC_CFI_363/2023Dusseldorf LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order under Rules 302.1 and 302.2 RoP concerning possible bifurcation or severance of issues in an infringement action by Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. against expert e-Commerce GmbH and others, involving EP 3 926 698 B1 and EP 3 223 320 B1.