Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-30 | UPC_APP_59050/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order granting Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH's request for leave to file an additional brief under R.36 RoP, based on new information about Mammut's 'Barryvox S' device featuring voice control, which Ortovox suspected might also fall within the scope of EP3466498. |
| 2024-10-30 | UPC_APP_54506/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division procedural order on FUJIFILM's request for permission to file additional written pleadings (R. 36 RoP) to respond to Kodak's right-of-prior-use defence in patent infringement proceedings. The court set out the test: the court must consider the reasons given for the necessity of further pleadings, but also the effect on the proceedings and the risk of delay. A claimant has only one opportunity under the standard timetable to address a prior-use defence, but R. 36 provides a safety valve. |
| 2024-10-29 | UPC_APP_58951/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in the infringement action (Dolby vs HP entities) addressing applications related to the main action, counterclaim for revocation, and a procedural application. |
| 2024-10-29 | UPC_APP_53031/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Court of Appeal partially granting a stay of enforcement (suspensive effect) of a first-instance injunction against Belkin Limited and its managing directors in proceedings concerning Koninklijke Philips N.V.'s patent. The stay was granted specifically regarding the injunctive orders against the managing directors (defendants 2-4) and related cost/publication orders, on the basis of a manifest error of law in holding that a managing director of an infringing company is personally liable as a 'middle person' under Art. 63(1) UPCA solely by virtue of their role as managing director. The stay was denied as to the remaining defendants. |
| 2024-10-29 | UPC_APP_53031/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Injunction denied | The Court of Appeal partially granted Belkin's application for suspensive effect concerning the Munich Local Division's infringement decision (UPC_CFI_390/2023) in respect of EP 2 867 997. The Court granted suspensive effect specifically in relation to the publication order (Philips was not permitted to publish the impugned decision pending the appeal). However, suspensive effect was denied in all other respects as Belkin failed to demonstrate manifest error or infringement of fundamental procedural rights. The Court also held that a director of a patent-infringing company is not a 'third party intermediary' under Art. 63 UPCA merely by reason of their directorship. Security for enforcement under R.352.1 RoP must be ordered at the time of the decision, not retrospectively. |
| 2024-10-25 | ORD_55012/2024 | Brussels LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Brussels Local Division procedural order (full panel: Granata, Kupecz, Voss) in infringement proceedings by Cretes NV against Hyler BV concerning EP 3 993 602 and EP 4 284 152, deciding under R. 37(2) RoP to handle both the infringement action (ACT_25743/2024) and the revocation counterclaim (CC_53420/2024) jointly for reasons of efficiency, consistent with the parties' wishes. The joint treatment ensures uniform patent interpretation by the same panel. |
| 2024-10-24 | UPC_APP_49295/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Hamburg Local Division ruled on a confidentiality application (R. 262A RoP) by 10x Genomics and Harvard College in infringement proceedings against Vizgen, ordering that certain exhibits containing licence agreements be treated as strictly confidential under an 'Outside Attorneys' Eyes Only' regime. |
| 2024-10-24 | UPC_APP_49295/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hamburg Local Division issued a preliminary procedural order in the 10x Genomics/Harvard v. Vizgen infringement proceedings, addressing a confidentiality request under Rule 262A RoP regarding a licence agreement submitted as evidence. |
| 2024-10-24 | UPC_APP_55164/2024 | Hamburg LD | Generic application | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The President of the Court of First Instance agreed to change the language of proceedings from German to English (the language of patent grant) at the defendants' request in an infringement action by Visibly Inc. against Easee entities, and addressed but did not require translation of existing German-language submissions. |
| 2024-10-24 | UPC_APP_52964/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Order from the Paris Central Division (UPC_CFI_427/2024) on Qualcomm's application for full or partial reimbursement of court fees following EPO interlocutory revision of a contested decision. The main proceedings were closed when the EPO rectified the contested decision. The Court rejected Qualcomm's request for fee reimbursement, finding no particular reason to deviate from the earlier order declining reimbursement, and noting that there is no review possible where the matter was handled by a single judge. |
| 2024-10-24 | UPC_APP_33127/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Costs | Withdrawn | Munich Local Division decision following the applicant Tiroler Rohre GmbH's withdrawal of an application for provisional measures (R. 265 RoP) after the oral hearing and after the court had indicated concerns about granting the measures. The court dismissed the respondents' (SSAB) opposition to the withdrawal, holding that a legitimate interest in obtaining a substantive decision does not arise merely because the respondents incurred costs defending against the application, even where the applicant has announced forthcoming main proceedings on the same subject matter. The court also declined to order a preliminary costs decision in favour of respondents following withdrawal. |
| 2024-10-22 | UPC_APP_47163/2024 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Order from the Central Division Munich (UPC_CFI_1/2023) on Dehns' application under R. 262.1(b) RoP for access to all written pleadings and evidence in the combined revocation and counterclaim for revocation proceedings (Sanofi v Amgen, EP 3 666 797). The Court granted partial access to case documents, subject to conditions proposed by Sanofi, to enable Dehns, a firm of UPC representatives, to better understand the Court's procedures. |
| 2024-10-22 | UPC_APP_47154/2024 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Central Division Section ruled on a third-party access application (R. 262.1(b) RoP) by Dehns (a large UPC representative firm) seeking access to all written pleadings and evidence in the Amgen-Regeneron revocation and counterclaim proceedings concerning EP 3 666 797 (decided on 16 July 2024). The court distinguished between procedural documents falling and not falling within the categories of 'written pleadings' and 'evidence', granting access to the qualifying documents. |
| 2024-10-21 | UPC_APP_55674/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Evidence | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal refused SharkNinja's application to admit new evidence (an exhibit from US proceedings, FBD 29) in the appeal from the Munich Local Division in Dyson's infringement action, finding that the evidence was not sufficiently relevant to the appellate issues concerning patent claim interpretation and that no justified reason for late submission had been established. |
| 2024-10-20 | UPC_APP_46519/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Evidence | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division rejected DISH Technologies and Sling TV's application for an order requiring AYLO entities to produce the source code of media players used in their browser implementations, finding that the claimants had not sufficiently exhausted available self-help means of proof before seeking compelled production. |
| 2024-10-20 | UPC_APP_46521/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Evidence | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued an order on a request for disclosure of information about content delivery networks (CDNs) under R.191 RoP, in an infringement action by DISH Technologies and Sling TV against AYLO and related entities concerning indirect patent infringement of EP2479680 across multiple European territories. |
| 2024-10-18 | UPC_APP_44953/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Decision of Munich Local Division in SES-imagotag SA v Hanshow Technology / Hanshow Germany / Hanshow France / Hanshow Netherlands on Hanshow's application for costs of the appeal proceedings before the Court of Appeal (APL_8/2024, UPC_CoA_1/2024). The court dismissed the costs application as inadmissible because it was not filed within the time limit. The court also rejected Hanshow's application for reinstatement (Wiedereinsetzung) as it had not been filed at the competent court (first instance) and the reinstatement fee had not been paid. |
| 2024-10-15 | CoA_PC 01/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | — | Dismissed | Court of Appeal declared Photon Wave's appeal inadmissible. The CoA held that leave to appeal under R.220.2 RoP (other than together with an appeal against the final decision) must be expressly granted by the Court of First Instance and cannot be presumed. As no express leave to appeal was granted by the Paris Local Division, the appeal was inadmissible. |
| 2024-10-15 | CoA_PC 01/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | — | Dismissed | Court of Appeal declared Photon Wave's appeal inadmissible. The Court held that leave to appeal under R. 220.2 RoP must be expressly granted by the Court of First Instance and cannot be presumed. Since the Paris Local Division had not expressly granted leave to appeal the procedural order of 24 July 2024, the appeal was inadmissible. |
| 2024-10-14 | UPC_APP_46766/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ordered Ballinno to provide security for Kinexon's legal costs in the revocation action concerning EP 1 944 067 B1 (sports tracking), refusing an oral hearing on the security issue and scheduling the main oral hearing for 21 March 2025. |
| 2024-10-14 | UPC_APP_52022/2024 | The Hague LD | Generic application | Evidence | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division (judge-rapporteur Brinkman) partially granted Winnow Solutions Limited's request under R. 190 RoP to order Orbisk B.V. to produce evidence (specific documents relating to its food waste monitoring product 'Orbi') in infringement proceedings concerning EP 3 198 245. The court found a prima facie case of infringement and that Winnow had presented reasonably available evidence; however, the request was too broad and was limited. Arguments on non-infringement and invalidity were reserved for full panel assessment. Orbisk's requests for a stay of the R.190 decision and for access restrictions were addressed in the order. |
| 2024-10-14 | UPC_APP_33486/2024 | Paris CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on applications for public access to pleadings and evidence filed by SWAT Medical AB (KIPA AB) in relation to revocation and counterclaim proceedings between Meril entities and Edwards Lifesciences concerning EP 3 646 825. |
| 2024-10-11 | ORD_56109/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Costs | Withdrawn | The Munich Local Division accepted the withdrawal of MSG Maschinenbau GmbH's infringement action and declared the revocation counterclaim moot (gegenstandslos), following the parties' agreement. Each party bears its own costs; partial court fee refunds were ordered for both sides. |
| 2024-10-11 | UPC_APP_51661/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hamburg Local Division panel reviewed a confidentiality order restricting access to a statement of defence and witness statement, addressing whether two US attorneys employed by the claimant should be admitted to the confidentiality club. |
| 2024-10-11 | UPC_APP_54390/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed CAN Srl/Airxcel Europe's request for an extension of the preliminary objection and statement of defence deadlines, finding no exceptional circumstances justifying an extension under Rule 9.3(a) RoP. |
| 2024-10-11 | UPC_APP_53731/2024 | Paris LD | Amend Document | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division dismissed Abbott's application under Rule 263 RoP for leave to amend its defence/case to include the newly released LibreLinkUp app version 4.12.0, in DexCom's infringement action concerning EP 3 831 282. While the first condition (amendment could not have been made earlier) was met, the second condition was not: granting the amendment would unreasonably hinder DexCom's preparation for the oral hearing scheduled in 10 days. Abbott retains the option to bring a separate action for non-infringement regarding the new product. |
| 2024-10-11 | UPC_APP_3393/2024 | Munich LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Costs only | The Munich Local Division issued a costs assessment order following provisional measures proceedings, determining recoverable legal costs for Hanshow's four defendant entities, finding a reasonable time expenditure of up to 150 hours per attorney and 40 hours per patent attorney, resulting in total assessed costs of approximately EUR 154,400. |
| 2024-10-10 | UPC_APP_55249/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | Order of the Düsseldorf Local Division refusing Aarke AB's request to adjourn the oral hearing in the infringement action by SodaStream Industries Ltd. concerning EP 1 793 917. The defendant sought adjournment pending an outstanding Court of Appeal order on its dismissed security for costs application. The Court found no convincing reasons to adjourn. |
| 2024-10-09 | UPC_APP_52471/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal ruled on Dyson's application to exclude certain grounds of appeal raised by SharkNinja that were not included in the statement of grounds of appeal, and on SharkNinja's application to admit new evidence. The order addressed admissibility of late-raised invalidity attack combinations (lack of inventive step based on various prior art combinations) and admission of new evidence under Rule 222.2 RoP. |
| 2024-10-09 | UPC_APP_52471/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (Second Panel) ruled on Dyson's request to disregard certain SharkNinja grounds of appeal and on SharkNinja's submission of new evidence (FBD 27) in the appeal against the Munich Local Division's order concerning EP 2 043 492. The court found that SharkNinja had sufficiently incorporated its first-instance submissions into the appeal grounds and rejected Dyson's request to disregard grounds (a)-(d). Ground (e) regarding JP 573 was not separately addressed given the court's assessment. New evidence FBD 27 (US proceedings submission) was found to be new and SharkNinja's justification for its late submission was accepted. |
| 2024-10-08 | UPC_APP_52773/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Central Division (judge-rapporteur) denied Edwards Lifesciences Corporation's application for a time extension to file its rejoinder in proceedings UPC_CFI_189/2024, holding that the principle of procedural efficiency must yield to the fair trial principle only where the extension would not disadvantage the party who had already complied with the shorter ordinary deadline. Since the respondents (Meril) had already met the ordinary deadline, granting Edwards an extension would be unfair. |
| 2024-10-07 | ORD_55063/2024 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Nordic-Baltic Regional Division (judge-rapporteur Kai Härmand) preliminary/case management order in Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.'s infringement action against Dexcom Inc. and Dexcom International Limited concerning EP 3 977 921 (a continuous glucose monitoring patent). The order addresses multiple pending applications including Abbott's R. 190 application to communicate information (partially dismissed following Paris LD precedent), Abbott's R. 191 application (found admissible but not justified), Abbott's application to change the statement of claim, Dexcom's request for security for legal costs, and sets procedural deadlines and oral hearing preparation steps. |
| 2024-10-02 | ORD_46842/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division admitted a patent pool administrator (Access Advance LLC) as an intervener on the side of the claimant (NEC) in infringement proceedings against TCL entities, granting it limited access to the case file subject to existing confidentiality restrictions. |
| 2024-10-02 | ORD_54526/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division ruled on an application to admit a third-party intervention by a patent pool administrator, holding that the administrator has a legal interest in the outcome of proceedings and may intervene. The order also addressed the intervener's access to confidential information in the proceedings. |
| 2024-10-02 | ORD_46985/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | motionName.substantive_other | Procedural only | Munich Local Division order admitting the intervention of Access Advance LLC (patent pool administrator) in NEC Corporation v. TCL Deutschland GmbH et al. (EP 2 863 637). The court held: (1) a patent pool administrator has a legal interest in proceedings (R. 313 RoP); (2) admission is not precluded by Art. 101 TFEU competition law concerns; (3) the intervener is treated as a party (R. 315(4) RoP) and granted file access, subject to the existing confidentiality restrictions. A detailed confidentiality order was issued specifying which FRAND negotiation information remains restricted, with the intervener's representatives granted access to certain but not all restricted categories. |
| 2024-10-01 | UPC_APP_40442/2024 | Milan LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division denied EOFLOW CO LTD's application to intervene as a third party in Insulet's provisional measures proceedings against Menarini under R.313 RoP, holding that efficiency of the proceedings and other balancing considerations weighed against admitting the intervention. |
| 2024-10-01 | ORD_52068/2024 | Milan CD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Milan Central Division procedural order in provisional measures proceedings by Insulet Corporation against EOFlow Co. Ltd. concerning EP 4 201 327 (insulin pump). A. Menarini Diagnostics (exclusive distributor of EOFlow) applied to intervene. The Court rejected the intervention request, reasoning that interim injunction proceedings should not be burdened with interventions that could slow down the accelerated procedure, and Menarini could pursue its interests in subsequent merits proceedings. |
| 2024-09-30 | UPC_APP_42517/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | Order of the Paris Central Division (full panel) on Microsoft Corporation's application for security for legal costs against Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy (a Finnish NPE). The court addressed the standard for ordering security: the financial position of the respondent must give rise to a legitimate and real concern that a costs order may not be recoverable or enforceable. The court found Microsoft established the highest possible insolvency risk, as Suinno lacked substantial assets. The court ordered Suinno to provide adequate security for costs in the infringement action (UPC_CFI_164/2024). The respondent's reciprocal request was rejected. |
| 2024-09-27 | UPC_APP_53213/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal issued a separate notification to NST (Network System Technologies LLC) pursuant to R.158.4 RoP, informing it that failure to provide the ordered security for costs within three weeks may result in a decision by default in the main infringement proceedings brought by NST against Volkswagen AG. |
| 2024-09-27 | UPC_APP_53570/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Dismissed | Düsseldorf Local Division (27 September 2024) refused Mammut's application for leave to file additional submissions in response to the CoA's order of 25 September 2024, finding that the CoA order did not provide grounds for allowing further submissions in the main proceedings. |
| 2024-09-26 | ORD_53245/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Settled | The Düsseldorf Local Division accepted the withdrawal of Dolby International AB's infringement action against Optoma entities following an out-of-court settlement. Each party bears its own costs; Dolby received a 60% refund of its court fees. |
| 2024-09-26 | UPC_APP_31889/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division judge-rapporteur referred to the full panel a request by Xiaomi (defendants) to stay the infringement proceedings pending a UK High Court FRAND determination. The judge-rapporteur determined that the stay application raised issues of principle best decided by the full panel, and that the matter should be addressed at or after the scheduled oral hearings in late 2024 / early 2025. |
| 2024-09-25 | UPC_APP_52697/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in the Innovative Sonic v Lenovo/Motorola infringement action concerning EP2765731, addressing case management matters in an action involving multiple defendants across several European countries. |
| 2024-09-25 | ORD_53404/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in the Magna v. Valeo proceedings concerning EP 3 320 602, addressing the rules on evidence applicable in provisional measures (preliminary injunction) proceedings under R. 9 RoP and R. 210.2 RoP, in preparation for the oral hearing scheduled for 8 October 2024. |
| 2024-09-25 | UPC_APP_33728/2024 | Munich LD | Amend Document | Procedural | Procedural only | Munich Local Division procedural order (judge-rapporteur Dr. Zigann) in an infringement action by Heraeus Electronics GmbH & Co. KG and Heraeus Precious Metals GmbH & Co. KG against Vibrantz GmbH concerning EP 3 215 288 (sintering/bonding material technology). The order ruled on Heraeus's application under R. 263 VerfO to amend several claim requests, granting some amendments (including unconditional restriction of claims as to Germany to reflect a German Federal Patent Court judgment upholding a use claim) and addressing others on their merits. No costs decision at this stage. |
| 2024-09-24 | UPC_APP_50666/2024 | Milan CD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | Milan Central Division (24 September 2024) – R. 333 review panel approved the judge-rapporteur's order of 4 September 2024, which declined to order joinder with the parallel Milan Local Division proceedings and retained the case in the Central Division. The panel confirmed the JR's competence to act in the absence of an assigned full panel. |
| 2024-09-24 | UPC_APP_49796/2024 | Paris LD | Amend Document | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division procedural order (judge-rapporteur) in an infringement action by I.G.B. S.r.l. against Unilever France concerning EP 3 997 002. Unilever France sought leave under R. 263 RoP to amend its requests, specifically regarding modalities for recall/destruction measures (timing, guarantee obligations under R. 352 RoP) as a conditional alternative in the event the court ordered such measures. The order addresses admissibility and scope of the amendment of requests. |
| 2024-09-23 | UPC_APP_33484/2024 | Paris CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division (Seat) ruled on a third-party access application (R. 262.1(b) RoP) by KIPA AB (an anonymised applicant) seeking access to all pleadings and evidence in the revocation action between Meril entities and Edwards Lifesciences Corporation concerning EP 4 151 181. The court assessed the applicant's interest as a competitor investor in cardiac implant technology. |
| 2024-09-20 | UPC_APP_51893/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order on Valeo's R. 262A RoP application for protection of confidential information in the Magna v. Valeo infringement proceedings concerning EP 3 320 602. The court denied Valeo's request for access for a specific additional lawyer (Thierry Lautier) to confidential information, finding no legitimate basis distinguishable from the general representation team. |
| 2024-09-18 | UPC_APP_33494/2024 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Nordic-Baltic Regional Division (full panel) on the same anonymized applicant's third parallel request for access to pleadings and evidence under Rule 262.1(b) RoP in the Edwards Lifesciences v. Meril proceedings (EP 2 628 464). Filed as App_33494/2024, this order applies the same legal principles on public access as the companion orders in App_33316/2024 and App_33493/2024, with substantially identical headnotes and analysis. |