| 2026-01-09 | UPC_CoA_5/2025 | Court of Appeal | Withdrawal (RoP265) | Withdrawal | Withdrawn | The Court of Appeal permitted Juul Labs International, Inc. to withdraw its appeal against the Central Division Paris revocation decision (UPC_CFI_309/2023, 5 November 2024), which had revoked EP 3 498 115 in multiple UPC member states. The withdrawal followed the EPO Boards of Appeal dismissing Juul Labs' appeal on 17 October 2025, confirming the EPO Opposition Division's revocation of 4 March 2024. NJOY had no legitimate interest in the appeal being decided. Court fees were reimbursed under the pre-2026 rate. |
| 2026-01-08 | UPC_CFI_377/2025 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division partially granted Primetals Technologies' application for an order to produce evidence under Art. 59 UPCA / R. 190 RoP, requiring Danieli to disclose documents relating to alleged infringement of EP 2 624 977 in steel coiling installations supplied to Hoa Phat Group in Vietnam. |
| 2026-01-07 | UPC_CFI_433/2024 | Paris CD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Revoked | Decision of the Paris Central Division (Panel 2) dated 7 January 2026 on Microsoft Corporation's counterclaim for revocation of EP 2 671 173 (mobile location-based search technology) owned by Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy. The court found the patent invalid for lack of inventive step over prior art documents BP07 and BP08. Auxiliary Requests I through further auxiliary requests were examined: Auxiliary Request I was found inadmissible or failed on added subject-matter; subsequent auxiliary requests lacked clarity or were inadmissible. The patent was thus revoked. The decision also addresses the requirements for admissible patent amendment applications under R. 30 RoP. |
| 2026-01-06 | UPC_CoA_2/2026 | Court of Appeal | Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) | motionName.appeal_decision | Dismissed | The standing judge of the Court of Appeal (Rian Kalden) dismissed Angelalign's request for discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP) of the Düsseldorf Local Division's procedural order of 16 December 2025 (which had disregarded certain non-infringement arguments and an exhibit in the provisional measures proceedings concerning EP 4 346 690). The request was dismissed as Angelalign failed to provide sufficiently specific references to support its claim that the impugned order was 'manifestly erroneous'. |
| 2025-12-30 | UPC_CFI_1771/2025 | Paris CD | Action against the decision of the EPO (RoP97) | motionName.appeal_epo | Dismissed | Decision by the Paris Central Division (acting as administrative court under Rule 97 RoP) dismissing PAPST LICENSING's application to annul the EPO's decision rejecting its request for unitary effect for EP 3 327 608. The court upheld the EPO's refusal on the basis that the patent did not designate Malta (a participating member state at the time of grant), and unitary effect requires designation of all participating member states as per Art. 3(1) of Regulation 1257/2012. Key holdings: unitary effect tied to grant, not filing; territorial protection covers all participating states regardless of use; EPO's rejection was mandatory under Rule 7(2) DOEPS; proportionality and fundamental rights arguments rejected. |
| 2025-12-30 | UPC_CFI_648/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division allowed ETRI's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Shenzhen Transsion and related defendants. Each party bears its own costs; 60% of court fees were reimbursed to the claimant. |
| 2025-12-29 | UPC_CFI_723/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI denied | The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Align Technology's application for a preliminary injunction against Angelalign entities concerning dental aligner patent EP 4 346 690, and addressed a request for leave to appeal the order. |
| 2025-12-29 | UPC_CoA_936/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | The President of the Court of Appeal (Klaus Grabinski, Standing Judge) rejected Amazon's application for suspensive effect regarding the Mannheim Local Division's Anti-Suit Injunction (ASI) order of 22 December 2025, which confirmed an earlier order of 30 September 2025 prohibiting Amazon from pursuing or enforcing anti-suit injunctions against InterDigital's UPC patent enforcement actions. Amazon failed to demonstrate the order was 'manifestly erroneous', which is the threshold for suspensive effect under the UPC's case law. |
| 2025-12-29 | UPC_CoA_71/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Revoked | The Court of Appeal dismissed VMR Products' appeal against the Central Division decision revoking EP 3 456 214 (vaporiser/e-cigarette patent). All claims, including auxiliary requests and dependent claims 12–14, were found to lack inventive step, primarily in view of prior art document Pan. The appeal raised procedural issues about the permissibility of new invalidity grounds in the Defence to the Application to Amend (R. 43.3 RoP) and the admission of new evidence. VMR Products bears NJOY's costs up to the applicable ceiling. |
| 2025-12-29 | UPC_CFI_351/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division addressed Canon's request for simultaneous interpretation from English into Japanese during the oral hearing, for corporate representatives joining remotely from Japan. |
| 2025-12-24 | UPC_CoA_911/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application to leave to appeal a cost decision (RoP221) | Costs | Dismissed | The standing judge of the Court of Appeal (Emmanuel Gougé) dismissed Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy's application for leave to appeal the Paris Central Division's cost decision of 6 November 2025, which had ordered Suinno to pay EUR 350,000 in costs to Microsoft Corporation in connection with the infringement action UPC_CFI_164/2024 (EP 2 671 173). The CoA found the costs award reasonable and proportionate given the EUR 5,000,000 case value and EUR 600,000 ceiling, and that Suinno did not demonstrate that the first-instance court's assessment was wrong. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_809/2025 | Paris CD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on a preliminary objection by Robert Bosch companies challenging its jurisdiction over an infringement action by Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyages concerning EP 2 671 766 (wiper system patent). The court upheld the objection and transferred the case to the Düsseldorf Local Division, finding that the Central Division lacked competence. The language of proceedings before the Düsseldorf Local Division was set as English. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CoA_691/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Withdrawn | The Court of Appeal permitted the joint withdrawal of Lindal Dispenser GmbH's appeal against the Paris Central Division decision maintaining EP 3 655 346 as amended (revocation action UPC_CFI_202/2024). The proceedings were declared closed by consent. No cost order was made (both parties agreed). 60% of the appeal court fees were reimbursed to Lindal under R. 370.9(b)(i) RoP as the withdrawal was filed before the Statement of Response. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_683/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. withdrew its infringement action concerning EP 3 471 419 against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. Defendants 1-4 and 6 consented; Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented. No cost compensation was sought. Huawei was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 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. |
| 2025-12-22 | UPC_CFI_936/2025 | Mannheim LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a further procedural order in the InterDigital v. Amazon preliminary measures proceedings, addressing additional case management steps following the oral hearing of 14 November 2025. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CoA_906/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Dismissed | The Court of Appeal disposed of Viatris's procedural appeal (UPC_CoA_906/2025) under R.220.2 RoP as devoid of purpose under R.360 RoP. The procedural appeal concerned the Paris Local Division's panel review order confirming disregard of certain Viatris exhibits as late-filed. The Court found the appeal had no purpose because, after Viatris had filed this procedural appeal, the Paris Local Division issued its final order of 21 November 2025 rejecting Merz's application for provisional measures in Viatris's favour. Viatris could instead raise the issue of the excluded exhibits in the separate merits appeal (UPC_CoA_917/2025) brought by Merz against that final order. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CoA_903/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | A very short order signed by judges Nathalie Sabotier, Rian Kalden, and Ingeborg Simonsson on 19 December 2025, in the case UERAN Technology LLC v. Xiaomi group entities (partial overlap with UPC_CoA_902/2025). The text of the decision body is not captured in the excerpt; only the signatures are visible. This appears to be a procedural order in an appeal. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CoA_902/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | A very short order signed by judges Nathalie Sabotier, Rian Kalden, and Ingeborg Simonsson on 19 December 2025, in the case UERAN Technology LLC v. Xiaomi group entities. The text of the decision body is not captured in the excerpt; only the signatures are visible. This appears to be a procedural order in an appeal. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CFI_515/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI granted | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted a preliminary injunction against Andreas Rentmeister and Shenzhen Moan Technology for infringement of HP's logic circuitry patent EP 3 835 965, deciding on the merits after the defendants failed to lodge an objection following deemed service. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CFI_494/2025 | Hamburg LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Hamburg Local Division procedural order on HMD Global's request for production of licence agreements (R. 190 RoP) in Fraunhofer's SEP infringement action. The Court granted partial disclosure: HMD's request regarding the AAC Patent License Agreement with a named third party (whose identity is redacted) was granted subject to a confidentiality declaration, as Fraunhofer had consented. The request regarding a second bilateral agreement was not yet ripe for determination. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CFI_494/2025 | Hamburg LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Duplicate of the Hamburg Local Division order (19 December 2025) on HMD Global's request for production of licence agreements under R. 190 RoP in Fraunhofer's MPEG-4/AAC SEP infringement proceedings against HMD Global. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CFI_681/2024 | Munich LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Not infringed | The Munich Local Division dismissed both the infringement action (UPC_CFI_437/2024) brought by GXD-Bio Corporation and the counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_681/2024) brought by the Myriad defendants, concerning EP 3 346 403 (a patent on data processing/gene expression analysis for identifying endogenous reference genes). The Court found no infringement because the accused products (Myriad test kits) did not use the claimed three-step normalization method — the products used a single-step average normalization that differed from the patented calculation method. The counterclaim for revocation was also dismissed, so the patent was maintained. Each party bears its own costs, with costs capped at EUR 600,000 total. |
| 2025-12-19 | UPC_CFI_660/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Revoked | The Court revoked European patent EP 3 652 914 B1 in its entirety in the territories of France and Germany on the basis of the counterclaim for revocation filed by Palo Alto Networks. The claims (including the unconditionally amended main request and all auxiliary requests) were found to lack inventive step in light of the prior art. As a consequence, the infringement action was dismissed. Centripetal was ordered to bear the costs of the litigation. The value in dispute was set at EUR 2 million (EUR 1 million each for the infringement action and counterclaim). |
| 2025-12-18 | UPC_CFI_104/2025 | Paris CD | Counterclaim for revocation | Procedural | Procedural only | The Central Division Paris issued a procedural order following the interim conference of 11 December 2025 in proceedings between IMI Hydronic Engineering Deutschland GmbH (revocation action) and Belparts Group N.V. (patent proprietor and counterclaim for infringement). The order addresses IMI's request for security for costs of EUR 500,000. The Court applied the test from the CoA decision in Chint v Jingao (July 2025): security requires a legitimate and real concern about recoverability of costs. As Belparts is seated in Belgium (EU member state), IMI had not demonstrated enforcement difficulties, and the security request appears to have been denied. The full dispositif was not captured in the available text extract. |
| 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. |
| 2025-12-17 | UPC_CoA_926/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Court of Appeal (Panel 1a) in the register-access appeal proceedings (Huawei v. TP-Link regarding access to UPC proceedings documents) on TP-Link's application for suspensive effect of the appeal under Rule 220.2 RoP, filed on 17 December 2025. The order addressed whether the Munich Local Division's orders of 28 November 2025 restricting register access should be stayed pending the appeal. This is a precursor procedural step to the substantive decision on register access issued on 17 February 2026. |
| 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. |
| 2025-12-12 | UPC_CFI_525/2025 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Costs | Procedural only | Order of the Munich Local Division granting a security for costs application (Rule 158 RoP) filed by OPPO, OnePlus, Realme and other defendants against ASUS Technology Licensing Inc. (a claimant incorporated in Taiwan) in an infringement action. The Court found that enforcing a cost decision in Taiwan would be at least unduly burdensome given the absence of international agreements or national Taiwanese laws guaranteeing enforcement of foreign judgments, and ordered security in connection with the infringement action (but not the as-yet unfiled counterclaim for revocation). |
| 2025-12-12 | UPC_CFI_146/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a rectification order under Rule 353 RoP correcting factual errors in a prior decision in the Sanofi v. Stada/Dr Reddy/Zentiva proceedings, including corrections regarding marketing authorisation holders and expert witness attribution. |
| 2025-12-12 | UPC_CFI_146/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Revoked | The Munich Local Division found patent EP 2 493 466 (relating to cabazitaxel pharmaceutical formulations) invalid for lack of inventive step in infringement proceedings brought by Sanofi against STADA, Dr. Reddy's and Zentiva entities, dismissing the infringement claims. |
| 2025-12-10 | UPC_CFI_251/2025 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division issued a case management order addressing Maxell's 44 conditional auxiliary requests in infringement proceedings against Samsung concerning EP 2 061 230, requesting clarification on the reasonable number of auxiliary requests per R. 30.1(c) RoP. |
| 2025-12-10 | UPC_CFI_351/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a post-interim-conference order in the Canon v. Katun proceedings, setting the feature breakdown of claim 1 of EP 3 686 683 to be used at the oral hearing. |
| 2025-12-10 | UPC_CFI_316/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Infringed | The 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. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CFI_999/2025 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Central Division rejected Nanoval's preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) seeking dismissal of ALD France's revocation action. The Court held that ALD France S.A.S. and the ALD Vacuum Technologies GmbH (party in the Munich Local Division proceedings) are not the same party, so the revocation action before the Central Division is not inadmissible on grounds of party identity. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CFI_432/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division permitted Headwater Research's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Apple entities and the corresponding withdrawal of Apple's counterclaim for revocation of EP 3 107 243, with no costs order by agreement of the parties. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CoA_12/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | — | outcomeName.other | Italian-language version of the Court of Appeal decision (same case as UPC_CoA_8/2025) on damages and costs in the Bhagat v Oerlikon appeal (EP 2 145 848). The CoA confirmed Bhagat's negligent infringement, rejected Oerlikon's reputational damage claims, and upheld the 80/20 cost split from the first-instance proceedings. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CoA_8/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | outcomeName.other | Court of Appeal decision on damages and costs in appeal by Bhagat Textile Engineers against the first-instance infringement decision (EP 2 145 848). The CoA confirmed that Bhagat was at least negligent (Art. 68(1) UPCA) having exhibited the infringing product at ITMA 2023 without checking the patent landscape. Oerlikon's claims for moral/reputational prejudice were rejected as insufficiently substantiated. The CoA upheld the CFI's cost allocation (Bhagat to bear 80% of first-instance costs). The CoA determined the damages quantum. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CFI_499/2024 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division issued a procedural order addressing the defendant's attempt to set aside the default judgment, ruling that the defendant had been sufficiently warned of the default consequence and that the prior R. 275 and R. 320 orders preclude a fresh challenge under R. 356 RoP. |
| 2025-12-05 | UPC_CFI_712/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI granted | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted a preliminary injunction to Roche against A. Menarini Diagnostics for infringement of EP 1 962 668 B1 (implantable glucose sensor), ordering a recall and seizure of infringing sensors in France, Italy, and Germany, with an order to disclose distribution information and payment of EUR 32,051 provisional costs. |
| 2025-12-05 | UPC_CFI_414/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | Decision of the Mannheim Local Division dated 5 December 2025 dismissing Centripetal Limited's infringement action against Keysight Technologies entities for infringement of EP 3 821 580 (methods and systems for network protection). Centripetal alleged direct infringement of claim 16 and indirect infringement of claim 1 in Germany, Italy, France and the Netherlands. The panel found that the defendants' products (AppStack, SecureStack-SSL, Threat Simulator) did not read on the claims as construed: defendants denied in the oral hearing that the source code contained functionality for threat-metadata-based routing to a CAS (a claim requirement), and Centripetal failed to substantiate its contrary position with sufficient evidence or proof under R. 171 RoP. The conditional counterclaim for revocation was not decided as the condition (infringement finding) was not met. Centripetal was ordered to bear all costs of the infringement proceedings. |
| 2025-12-05 | UPC_CFI_414/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Mannheim Local Division dated 5 December 2025 rejecting Centripetal Limited's request to reopen the oral hearing and appoint an expert to review the source code of Keysight's products, filed on 24 November 2025 after the closure of the hearing. The court held that R. 114 RoP permits reopening only in exceptional cases identified during the oral hearing itself (e.g. for necessary additional testimony or experimental evidence emerging from the hearing) and is not available as a tool to introduce new infringement allegations after closure. Claimant's argument that defendants' counsel had made false statements about source code functionality was not sufficient to trigger R. 114 RoP. The request was rejected. |
| 2025-12-04 | UPC_CFI_806/2025 | Brussels LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Brussels Local Division issued a final order under R. 19 RoP accepting Yealink's withdrawal of its preliminary objection to territorial competence, noting that the LD Brussels had already established its jurisdiction in the earlier PI proceedings between the same parties over EP 3 732 827. |
| 2025-12-04 | UPC_CFI_415/2025 | Brussels LD | Withdrawal (RoP265) | Withdrawal | Costs only | The Brussels Local Division issued a cost decision following withdrawal of CooperSurgical's infringement action against Motiva/Establishment Labs distributors, awarding costs to the defendants including EUR 5,757.90 to Defendants 1-2 and EUR 75,836.60 to Defendant 3, applying an ex ante proportionality assessment with an implied ceiling of EUR 100,000. |
| 2025-12-04 | UPC_CFI_307/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The 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). |
| 2025-12-02 | UPC_CoA_894/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Court of Appeal single judge on Windhager Handelsgesellschaft's application for suspensive effect (Rule 223 RoP) of its appeal against the Mannheim Local Division judgment largely upholding bellissa HAAS GmbH's infringement action for EP 2 223 589 and rejecting Windhager's revocation counterclaim. Windhager alleged obvious errors in the first-instance assessment of direct infringement and the rejection of the revocation counterclaim. The order addressed the admissibility of the application (corrected after formality defects) and the substantive criteria for granting suspensive effect. |
| 2025-12-01 | UPC_CoA_838/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Dismissed | The Court of Appeal dismissed Innovative Sonic's appeal against the refusal to change the language of proceedings back to German in the Munich Local Division infringement action against OPPO et al. The court held that the language of the parties (different from German) and the language qualifications of representatives were not sufficiently weighty to justify a second language change, and that English was already in use. |