Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-01-20 | UPC_APP_68644/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | Court of Appeal granted Amazon's application under R. 262A RoP, ordering restricted access to confidential information (identity of licensees and content of Nokia's licence agreements) contained in Amazon's appeal and Statement of Grounds of Appeal in the Nokia v. Amazon proceedings concerning EP 2 661 892. |
| 2025-01-20 | UPC_CoA_835/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Court of Appeal dated 20 January 2025 on Amazon's R. 262A RoP application for confidentiality protection regarding Nokia's licensing and licence-agreement information disclosed in infringement proceedings (Nokia v. Amazon, UPC_CFI_399/2023). The CoA granted Amazon's request for confidentiality, ordering that certain grey-highlighted passages and 'strictly confidential' annexes regarding Nokia's licensee identities and licence agreement terms be restricted in access to designated persons only, beyond the CFI's existing classification. |
| 2025-01-20 | UPC_CFI_430/2023 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | The Nordic-Baltic Regional Division declared proceedings closed following the mutual withdrawal of Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.'s infringement action and Dexcom's counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 3 977 921. Both parties consented to each other's withdrawal and agreed that no cost decision would be issued. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_APP_907/2025 | Munich LD | Application Rop305 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order in multiple related infringement actions by Sanofi against various generic manufacturers (Accord, STADA, Dr. Reddy's, Zentiva) concerning EP 2 493 466. The order addressed the substitution of Sanofi Mature IP by Sanofi SA as new patent proprietor following Sanofi Mature IP's dissolution, and the consequential procedural steps under R. 310 RoP. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_APP_2273/2025 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Settled | Decision from the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_498/2023) declaring the infringement action by NEC against TCL entities closed following a contractual settlement reached before closure of the written proceedings. NEC withdrew the infringement action (R. 265 RoP) and requested 60% reimbursement of court fees, relying on the settlement. The Court confirmed each party would bear its own costs and addressed the fee reimbursement request. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_487/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Munich Local Division confirmed the withdrawal of NEC Corporation's patent infringement action against TCL entities concerning EP 2 645 714. The parties had reached a contractual agreement before closure of the written procedure. The court granted the withdrawal and ordered 60% reimbursement of court fees to the claimant. Each party bears its own costs; no cost decision was issued. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_376/2023 | Brussels LD | Infringement Action | — | Not infringed | Decision on the merits by the Brussels Local Division (full panel) in an infringement action concerning a patent on a medical device (sleep apnea treatment). The court dismissed both the literal infringement claim and the infringement-by-equivalence claim against OrthoApnea S.L. and Vivisol B BV. On literal infringement, the court interpreted the patent claims in light of the claim as a whole and found the accused products did not meet all claim features. On equivalence, the court found no functional equivalence regardless of which equivalence test was applied. The court also lifted the earlier evidence-preservation order (seizure) and ordered the claimant (unnamed, anonymized) to pay the defendants' costs. A key procedural holding addressed the temporal conditions for bringing main proceedings following evidence preservation. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_316/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | — | Revoked | The Paris Central Division (Seat, Panel 1) revoked European patent EP 3 430 921 B1 in its entirety, with effect for Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The claimant NJOY Netherlands B.V. succeeded in demonstrating that granted claim 1 lacked clarity/added matter, and the defendant Juul Labs International Inc.'s twelve auxiliary requests were all found unallowable. A thirteenth conditional auxiliary request (2d) was rejected as unreasonably numerous and unclear. Juul Labs was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_APP_64836/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hamburg Local Division issued a procedural order addressing the claimant Daedalus Prime's request to refer a counterclaim for revocation to the Paris Central Division while the infringement action remains at Hamburg, in the context of parallel revocation proceedings. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_APP_66712/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Procedural only | Hamburg Local Division judge-rapporteur allowed Tesla Germany GmbH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE to withdraw their cost assessment application (Rule 156 RoP) in proceedings UPC_CFI_54/2023, where the main action and counterclaim had been withdrawn at appeal level following an out-of-court settlement. The court held that while the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over the withdrawal of the main proceedings (pending on appeal), the first-instance cost assessment procedure remained before the first-instance judge-rapporteur under Rule 156.2 RoP, who alone could allow its withdrawal under Rule 265 RoP. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CoA_30/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal dismissed REEL GmbH's preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the UPC in a damages determination action brought by Fives ECL, SAS (UPC_CFI_274/2023). The CoA held that the UPC has jurisdiction under Art. 32(1)(a) and 32(1)(f) UPCA to determine damages following a national court judgment establishing infringement of EP 1 740 740. The separate action for damages is not limited to 'applications' under the Rules but constitutes an autonomous action; the court's competence also covers acts of infringement committed before the UPCA entry into force, provided the patent had not lapsed by 1 June 2023. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CoA_30/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (in German) set aside the Hamburg Local Division's order dismissing Fives ECL's standalone damages action and referred the case back to the Hamburg Local Division. The Court of Appeal held that the UPC has jurisdiction over a standalone action for assessment of damages where a national court has already found infringement and established the defendant's liability in principle, even for acts that pre-date the entry into force of the UPCA on 1 June 2023, provided the patent was still in force on that date. The Court confirmed that such actions fall within Art. 32(1) UPCA. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_APP_1182/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (judge-rapporteur Emmanuel Gougé) rejected Bhagat Textile Engineers' application for suspensive effect (R. 223 RoP) of the Milan Local Division's infringement judgment of 4 November 2024 concerning EP 2 145 848. The Milan LD had found Bhagat liable for infringement, issued an injunction for Italy and Germany, imposed a penalty payment of EUR 12,000, and ordered provisional damages of EUR 15,000. Bhagat failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying suspensive effect, having only vaguely claimed parallel invalidity proceedings and 'considerable doubts' about validity without substantiation. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_APP_1182/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Italian-language version of the Court of Appeal order (judge-rapporteur Emmanuel Gougé) rejecting Bhagat Textile Engineers' application for suspensive effect of the Milan Local Division's infringement judgment of 4 November 2024 (EP 2 145 848). Identical substance to the English version: Bhagat failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying suspensive effect. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CFI_627/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | — | Dismissed | President of the UPC Court of First Instance dismissed NVIDIA's application to change the language of proceedings from German to English under Art. 49(5) UPCA and R.323 RoP. The President found that NVIDIA had not demonstrated significant impairment in organising its defence due to the German language chosen by the claimants, who are domiciled in German-speaking countries. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CFI_33/2024 | Vienna LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Vienna 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. |
| 2025-01-15 | UPC_APP_68614/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Court of Appeal allowed Avago's withdrawal of its infringement appeal and Tesla's withdrawal of the counterclaims for revocation following a settlement, ordered 60% reimbursement of court fees, and declared all three appeal proceedings closed. |
| 2025-01-15 | UPC_APP_66724/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | Decision of the Court of Appeal (Panel 1) permitting withdrawal of Avago's appeal and counterclaim for revocation against a Hamburg Local Division decision in which the infringement action had been dismissed and the patent partially revoked. The Court of Appeal granted leave for withdrawal under Rule 265 RoP in appeal proceedings, holding that withdrawal is possible until the final decision becomes legally binding. As a consequence of the withdrawal of the revocation counterclaim, the pending requests to amend the patent became moot. The court also addressed reimbursement of court fees following the withdrawal. |
| 2025-01-15 | UPC_APP_1176/2025 | Milan LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Milan Local Division granted Alpinestars S.p.A.'s request to extend the deadline for filing its Statement of Defence and counterclaim for revocation from 20 January 2025 to 20 February 2025, to allow the outcome of EPO appeal proceedings concerning EP 3 498 117 (oral hearing on 13 February 2025) to be incorporated. The court held that extending time limits, rather than staying proceedings, best balances procedural efficiency and the right to be heard in light of concurrent EPO appeal proceedings. |
| 2025-01-15 | UPC_CFI_402/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Infringement action, related patent amendment application, and counterclaims for revocation all withdrawn by mutual agreement pursuant to Rule 265 RoP. Each party bears its own costs. No costs order between parties. |
| 2025-01-14 | APL_59329/2024 | Court of Appeal | Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal revoked the Mannheim Local Division's order on security for costs issued solely by the judge-rapporteur, finding that the judge-rapporteur was not competent to grant leave to appeal against such an order; the matter was referred back to the Court of First Instance for panel review. |
| 2025-01-14 | UPC_APP_67325/2024 | Paris CD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Paris Central Division permitted Bentley Motors Limited to withdraw its revocation action (ACT_19132/2024) against Network Systems Technologies LLC concerning EP 1 552 399. The respondent confirmed consent to the withdrawal and no cost application was filed by either party. The proceedings were deemed closed and all prior orders of no effect. |
| 2025-01-14 | ACT_2379/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Final decision in infringement action (with counterclaim for revocation) concerning an avalanche transceiver patent. The Düsseldorf Local Division found direct and indirect infringement by the Mammut defendants, granted an injunction, ordered recall and removal from distribution channels, ordered provision of accounts, and declared liability for damages (with EUR 3,000 preliminary damages awarded). The counterclaim for revocation was dismissed. Costs were split: claimant to bear 80%, each defendant 10% of infringement action costs; defendants to bear costs of revocation counterclaim. |
| 2025-01-14 | UPC_CFI_145/2024 | Munich LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order from Munich Local Division dated 14 January 2025 regarding R. 262A RoP confidentiality applications filed by defendants (Accord Healthcare, Stada, Dr. Reddy's, Zentiva) in Sanofi's infringement actions concerning EP 2 493 466. The order defines which representative and company personnel on each defendant's side are permitted access to unredacted versions of confidential documents produced in the proceedings. |
| 2025-01-14 | CC_17292/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Permanent injunction | The Düsseldorf Local Division found that Mammut Sports Group AG and GmbH infringed EP 3 466 498 B1 (owned by Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH, relating to a transceiver device for avalanche rescue) and dismissed the counterclaim for revocation, maintaining the patent. The Court granted an injunction, ordered product recall and removal from distribution channels, ordered disclosure of information and accounting, and awarded EUR 3,000 in provisional damages. Indirect infringement was found because Mammut induced end-users to activate the infringing feature. The Court rejected the request for publication of the decision as Ortovox's interests were sufficiently protected by the injunction. 80% of infringement action costs borne by claimant (Ortovox) and 10% each by defendants; counterclaim costs borne equally by defendants. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_APP_223/2025 | Unknown | — | Preliminary injunction | Withdrawn | The Munich Local Division allowed Avago Technologies' withdrawal of its application for provisional measures against Realtek Semiconductor. The ex parte order had not yet been served, and the proceedings were declared closed. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_APP_1210/2025 | Unknown | — | Preliminary injunction | Settled | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order recording the settlement between the parties and permitting the withdrawal of Huawei's application for provisional measures against Netgear entities. The parties had reached an out-of-court settlement, agreed on costs (no court cost decision sought), and requested release of the EUR 3,000,000 security previously deposited. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_APP_68553/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Court of Appeal permitted Valeo Electrification's withdrawal of its provisional measures appeal action (and the underlying main proceedings before the first instance) following the parties' agreement. The appeal proceedings concerned a preliminary injunction granted by the Düsseldorf Local Division on 31 October 2024 against Magna PT for infringement of EP 3 320 602 in Germany and France. The parties agreed no cost decision was needed. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_APP_68579/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | Court of Appeal order allowing withdrawal of Valeo's appeal in provisional measures proceedings concerning an electrification patent, following withdrawal by Valeo under R. 265 RoP. Valeo had obtained a preliminary injunction against Magna at first instance (Düsseldorf LD) which was then appealed by Magna. The Court of Appeal had previously suspended the injunction. Valeo then withdrew its appeal. The Court allowed the withdrawal and closed the proceedings. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_CFI_298/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 333 | — | Procedural only | Munich Local Division issued a revised order modifying a previous case management order (of 14 October 2024) to require claimant Harvard College to submit its auxiliary requests (in the application to amend the patent) within 20 days after the decision of the EPO Opposition Division, rather than at a fixed date, in light of a pending EPO opposition with oral proceedings scheduled. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_APP_1411/2025 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Munich Local Division allowed Netgear's withdrawal of its declaration of non-infringement action (ACT_16294/2024) following agreement by the parties, declared the proceedings closed, ordered each party to bear its own costs, and directed reimbursement of 40% of Netgear's court fees. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_APP_68581/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division allowed Valeo Electrification's withdrawal of the infringement action and the defendants' withdrawal of the counterclaim for revocation, with both parties agreeing not to seek cost reimbursement. |
| 2025-01-10 | APL_54646/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal addressed whether the appeal had become devoid of purpose following the conclusion of related provisional measure proceedings before the Local Division Milan. The appeal was declared moot as the main proceedings at first instance had ended. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_APP_1208/2025 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Local Division Munich allowed the mutual withdrawal of Huawei's infringement action and Netgear's revocation counterclaims concerning EP 3 611 989 by consent of both parties, following a first-instance decision that had been issued but was not yet final; each party bears its own costs and court fees are not refunded. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_APP_68359/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | Decision of the Munich Local Division permitting withdrawal of the infringement action by Dexcom Inc. against Abbott Laboratories and multiple Abbott entities, and withdrawal of the counterclaim for revocation and patent amendment application by the defendants. All parties mutually consented to withdrawal prior to the final decision date. Each party bears its own costs. |
| 2025-01-10 | ACT_578697/2023 | Paris LD | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Paris Local Division issued a costs decision in Hewlett-Packard Development Company LP v LAMA FRANCE (UPC_CFI_358/2023, infringement action concerning EP 2 089 230 and EP 1 737 669). Applying the prior decision of 13 November 2024 (50/50 cost split), the court rejected both parties' requests to raise the 50% ceiling on recoverable representation costs. Each party owes the other EUR 112,000 in representation costs and EUR 7,500 in court fees, resulting in a wash. No ceiling uplift was justified despite the complexity of the double-patent case. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_CFI_459/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Decision permitting withdrawal of Valeo Electrification's infringement action against Magna PT entities (EP 3 320 602 B1) and withdrawal of Magna's counterclaim for revocation. Both parties agreed no cost applications would be made. Defendants reserved the right to apply for partial reimbursement of court fees. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_APP_3187/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Costs only | The Munich Local Division ruled on the costs assessment in the Edwards v Meril preliminary injunction proceedings, holding that recoverable costs and disbursements assessed in a costs determination are not subject to interest. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_CFI_168/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Infringement action and counterclaim for revocation (including patent amendment applications) were both withdrawn by mutual agreement of the parties pursuant to Rule 265 RoP. Both parties bear their own costs. 40% of court fees refunded to each party. Oral hearing dates cancelled. |
| 2025-01-09 | ORD_1358/2025 | Munich LD | Decision By Default | Default judgment | Permanent injunction | Decision by default of the Munich Local Division against Guangzhou Aiyun Yanwu Technology Co., Ltd. (a Chinese company that failed to appear), granting air up group GmbH an injunction to cease and desist from offering, placing on the market, using, importing or storing a drinking device infringing EP 3 655 341 (claims 1, 2, 4, 10) throughout all UPC Member States. The defendant is also ordered to pay a penalty of up to EUR 100,000 per day for each infringement and costs of proceedings. |
| 2025-01-09 | APL_46747/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal dismissed Abbott Diabetes Care's appeal against a first-instance order on public access to the register (R. 262.1(b) RoP), confirming that a member of the public generally has an interest in accessing written pleadings and evidence after a decision concluding first-instance proceedings has been rendered, even if an appeal is pending. The court clarified the requirements for a 'reasoned request' for access and the balancing of interests under Art. 45 UPCA. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_APP_68623/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order by the Court of Appeal (UPC_CoA_769/2024, 9 January 2025) confirming that Menarini benefited from an automatic extension of the deadline for lodging its statement of response under R. 301.2 RoP because a CMS technical malfunction prevented filing around the 27 December 2024 deadline. The extension runs until the end of the first working day after the system became accessible again. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_509/2023 | Munich LD | Decision By Default | — | Infringed | Decision by default of Munich Local Division in air up group GmbH v Guangzhou Aiyun Yanwu Technology Co. Ltd. concerning EP 3 897 305 (drinking device with aroma). The defendant (Chinese company) failed to enter an appearance. The court found infringement and ordered: (A) cease and desist from offering, placing on the market, using, importing or storing the infringing drinking devices and aroma containers across all 17 UPC member states; (B) rendering of accounts; (C) damages; (D) recall, removal and destruction of infringing products; and penalty payments for non-compliance. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CoA_611/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | Order of the Court of Appeal (Panel 2) granting DISH Technologies and Sling TV's application for reimbursement of court fees following their withdrawal of an appeal against a security-for-costs order (EUR 800,000) issued by the Mannheim Local Division. The parties had been misled by an erroneous legal remedy instruction in the first-instance order, which led them to file both a panel review request and a precautionary appeal. The Court of Appeal granted full reimbursement of the appeal fee (EUR 1,500) since the appeal was filed only as a precaution due to the incorrect instruction and was subsequently withdrawn promptly. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_583/2024 | Paris LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Order by the President of the Court of First Instance granting XPENG et al.'s application to change the language of proceedings from German to English (the language in which the patent was granted) pursuant to Rule 323 RoP. ArcelorMittal required to provide English translations of the Statement of Claim at its own expense within 30 days. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_412/2023 | Paris CD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division (Seat) ruled on an application by ITCiCo Spain S.L. to set aside a default decision (R. 356 RoP) issued on 16 September 2024 against it in the revocation action of Bayerische Motoren Werke AG concerning EP 2 796 333. The court interpreted R. 356(2) RoP to require that the applicant demonstrate inability to comply due to reasons beyond its control (unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure). The application was considered on its merits. |
| 2025-01-08 | UPC_APP_67902/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop313 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal allowed MediaTek Inc.'s application to intervene as a party in the appeal proceedings (Daedalus Prime LLC v. Xiaomi) concerning an order restricting access to confidential information, and instructed MediaTek and Xiaomi to coordinate their submissions for the oral hearing. |
| 2025-01-08 | UPC_CFI_189/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Costs only | Order from the Paris Central Division dated 8 January 2025 on Meril entities' application for costs (App_56782/2024) seeking reimbursement of EUR 15,000 from respondents (SWAT Medical AB and others) incurred in defending a rejected public-access-to-register application. The order clarifies that a 'decision on the merits' under R. 150 RoP means a decision concluding litigation proceedings with res judicata effect; proceedings on a public access application are not 'litigation' in that sense. The court dismissed the costs application on the basis that a public access proceeding does not produce a 'decision on the merits' that triggers the costs provisions. |
| 2025-01-07 | UPC_APP_66720/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Munich Local Division granted Tesla's application to withdraw its counterclaim for revocation in the infringement proceedings brought by Avago Technologies, as both parties consented and no cost decision was requested; the revocation proceedings are formally terminated. |
| 2025-01-07 | UPC_APP_66758/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Munich Local Division allowed Avago Technologies International Sales' withdrawal of its infringement action against Tesla Germany GmbH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE. Each party bears its own costs. |