Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-05-02 | UPC_APP_20143/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal issued an order on the application for suspensive effect filed by Progress Maschinen & Automation AG, concerning an order by the Milan Local Division that had granted preservation of evidence and inspection orders in favour of AWM and SCHNELL. The court examined whether suspensive effect was warranted to prevent the appeal from being rendered largely ineffective. |
| 2024-05-01 | UPC_APP_23543/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | Court of Appeal (Second Panel) dismissed Daedalus Prime LLC's request for panel review of an order refusing extension of time for the Statement of Grounds of Appeal. The panel found no grounds to deviate from the judge-rapporteur's order, holding that the desire to present a thorough analysis or obtain a legal opinion does not justify extension. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_APP_14308/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division partially granted Panasonic Holdings Corporation's document-production request under R. 190 RoP, ordering Xiaomi entities to produce a specified licence agreement, while rejecting the further applications; the deadline for production was set to 9 May 2024. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_APP_19959/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division exercised its discretion to admit Edwards Lifesciences' subsequent request to amend patent EP 3 646 825 after the written procedure had closed, provided that Meril Italy was granted additional time to submit a defence to the new amendment, holding that such admission does not prejudice the opposing party's right of defence. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_APP_20743/2024 | Paris CD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled that a patent amendment request (EP 3 414 708) is inadmissible to the extent it concerns claims not challenged in the revocation action, establishing that the right to amend is a defensive tool limited to challenged claims. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_APP_14390/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Evidence | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in the Panasonic v Xiaomi infringement action concerning EP2568724, granting Panasonic's request for disclosure of a licence agreement (with possible redactions) as relevant to the claim, in the context of document production proceedings. |
| 2024-04-30 | ORD_23580/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Infringement merits | PI granted | Düsseldorf Local Division granted a preliminary injunction (30 April 2024) against Curio Bioscience Inc. ordering it to cease offering, marketing, using or possessing arrays for localised detection of nucleic acid in tissue samples in Germany, France, and Sweden that infringe EP 2 697 391. A penalty of up to EUR 100,000 per day of contravention was imposed. Enforceability was conditional on the applicant providing a security of EUR 2,000,000. |
| 2024-04-29 | UPC_APP_22293/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division procedural order granting the parties' joint application to change the language of proceedings from German to English under Art. 49(3) UPCA and R. 321 RoP. The patent (EP 2 697 391 B1) was granted in English. Both parties agreed to the language change, which was approved by the court in the 10x Genomics vs Curio Bioscience infringement proceedings. |
| 2024-04-26 | ORD_23089/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal (26 April 2024) ruled that AIM Sport Development AG was entitled to the longer appeal period under R. 224.1(a) RoP (2 months) rather than R. 220.1(c) (15 days) for lodging a statement of appeal, because the CFI incorrectly combined infringement and provisional measures proceedings in one decision without distinction, creating an excusable error on AIM's part. |
| 2024-04-25 | UPC_APP_18259/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division judge-rapporteur issued a procedural order in the Toyota Motor Europe revocation action against Neo Wireless, denying Neo Wireless's request to stay the proceedings pending EPO opposition proceedings and appeal of a preliminary objection. The court held that pending EPO proceedings did not meet the 'rapid decision' threshold under Art. 33(10) UPCA, and that the preliminary objection appeal did not justify a stay. |
| 2024-04-24 | UPC_APP_9728/2024 | Munich LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Munich Local Division in infringement proceedings concerning a Wi-Fi 6 standard-essential patent. The order granted the defendants' R. 190 RoP request for production of a Qualcomm patent licence agreement (claimed relevant to an exhaustion defence), subject to confidentiality protection measures (R. 262A RoP). The court ordered the agreement to be produced in full and unredacted, designated a named person (Anna Lam) to receive the confidential document on the defendants' behalf, and ordered associated protective measures. |
| 2024-04-24 | UPC_APP_587265/2023 | Paris CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on a third-party application by Nicoventures Trading for public access to court files under R.262.1(b) RoP in a revocation action concerning EP 3 430 921, applying guidelines from the Court of Appeal's decision on public register access. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11732/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division dismissed applications by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Incorporated, and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH requesting that the patent troll claimant Network System Technologies LLC provide security for legal costs, finding the conditions under Art. 69(4) UPCA and R. 158 RoP were not met. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11434/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division dismissed applications by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Incorporated, and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH requesting that claimant Network System Technologies LLC provide security for legal costs of €600,000 per defendant under Art. 69(4) UPCA; costs of the applications to be addressed in the main proceedings. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11444/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division ruled on security for costs applications by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Incorporated and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH against Network System Technologies LLC under Art. 69.4 UPCA. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11835/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Dismissed | The Munich Local Division dismissed applications by Volkswagen, Audi, and Texas Instruments for security for legal costs against Network System Technologies LLC (NST), finding that the defendants failed to sufficiently substantiate that NST's financial position posed a legitimate and real risk that a cost order would not be recoverable. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11454/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | Order of the Munich Local Division on three applications for security for legal costs (Rule 158 RoP, Art. 69.4 UPCA) filed by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Inc. and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH against Network System Technologies LLC as claimant in an infringement action concerning EP 1 552 399 B1. The Court denied the security applications, balancing the risk of non-enforcement against the right of NST to an effective remedy. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11833/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | Order of the Munich Local Division on applications for security for legal costs (Rule 158 RoP, Art. 69.4 UPCA) filed by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Inc. and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH against Network System Technologies LLC as claimant in a separate infringement action concerning EP 1 875 683 B1. As with the parallel case (UPC_APP_11454/2024), the Court denied the security applications, applying the same balancing analysis. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11453/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division denied the applications by Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, Texas Instruments Inc., and Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH for security for costs against Network System Technologies LLC (NST), the claimant domiciled in the US. The court held that mere foreign domicile is insufficient to order security, and that defendants failed to provide concrete evidence of actual difficulties in enforcing a cost order against NST. |
| 2024-04-23 | ORD_22211/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division procedural order following the Court of Appeal's reversal of the President's language decision, directing that the language of the proceedings be changed to English before the final order on provisional measures. The order deals with Germany's R. 14.2(c) RoP indication, allowing the judges to issue decisions in German with certified English translations, and enables the provisional measures decision (in the 10x Genomics vs Curio Bioscience matter, EP 2 697 391) to be issued promptly in both languages. |
| 2024-04-23 | UPC_APP_11431/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Munich Local Division on applications by Volkswagen, Audi and Texas Instruments for security for costs against Network System Technologies LLC (a US NPE claimant), in infringement proceedings concerning an integrated circuit patent. The applicants requested EUR 200,000 security per defendant. The Court considered the right to an effective remedy as a relevant factor, noting security for costs can restrict access to justice under Art. 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. |
| 2024-04-22 | ORD_5343/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted Seoul Semiconductor's application to intervene as a third party (Streithilfe) on the claimant's side as a simple licensee, finding it has a legal interest in preventing revocation of the patent-in-suit. |
| 2024-04-18 | ORD_20986/2024 | Hamburg LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Hamburg Local Division on the method of service of the statement of claim on Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Inc. (both domiciled in China) and MediaTek Inc. (domiciled in Taiwan) as defendants in infringement proceedings by Daedalus Prime LLC concerning EP 2 792 100. The Court ruled that service via the German branch offices under Rule 271.5(a) RoP was not possible since the Chinese/Taiwanese defendants did not have their own place of business within the UPCA contracting member states. Service must be effected via the Hague Service Convention. |
| 2024-04-15 | ORD_18121/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Local Division Düsseldorf ordered a joint hearing of the main infringement action and the revocation counterclaim, finding that combined treatment was efficient and appropriate given the panel had already considered both infringement and validity issues in the prior provisional measures proceedings. |
| 2024-04-15 | UPC_APP_12139/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Order by the President of the Court of First Instance (Mannheim LD, UPC_CFI_410/2023, 15 April 2024) on Advanced Bionics' application to change the language of proceedings from German to English (the language in which EP 4 074 373 was granted). The application was considered under Art. 49(5) UPCA and R. 323 RoP following consultation with the parties and the panel. |
| 2024-04-11 | UPC_APP_17551/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Order of the Court of Appeal setting out the time period for filing a Statement of appeal under Rule 220.2 RoP where leave to appeal is granted in the impugned order itself. The Court held that the 15-day period runs from service of the order containing the grant of leave (whether in the impugned order itself or in a separate order). The appeal arises from Neo Wireless GmbH & Co KG challenging rejection of a preliminary objection in revocation proceedings concerning EP 3 876 490 brought by Toyota Motor Europe. |
| 2024-04-09 | UPC_APP_17640/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal issued an order clarifying the date of service for appeal documents, establishing that service rules applicable at first instance continue to apply at the appeal level in proceedings involving Panasonic and the Xiaomi group entities. |
| 2024-04-09 | UPC_APP_17640/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (judge-rapporteur Rian Kalden) clarified the date of service of the Statement of appeal and grounds of appeal in the proceedings between Panasonic and Xiaomi. The Court held that, in appeal proceedings, service rules (Rules 270-279 RoP) apply mutatis mutandis. Where R.271.1 RoP applied at first instance (electronic address provided or representative accepted service), further service—including in appeal proceedings—must be effected through the UPC CMS. The headnote confirms that appeal service follows the same electronic system as first-instance service. |
| 2024-04-09 | UPC_APP_4074/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Request to review an order ex-parte | motionName.ex_parte | PI granted | Düsseldorf Local Division order (judge-rapporteur Thomas) on review of ex parte preliminary injunction in proceedings by Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH against Mammut Sports Group AG and GmbH concerning EP 3 466 498 (avalanche airbag backpack). The ex parte provisional measures order of 11 December 2023 was upheld following the inter partes review. Mammut was ordered to reimburse Ortovox's costs of EUR 33,375.70; Mammut's own cost claim of EUR 19,858.40 was rejected. Security of EUR 500,000 was maintained. No merits costs order (deferred to main proceedings). |
| 2024-04-08 | UPC_APP_16619/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order from the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_501/2023) rejecting Meril's request for a three-week extension to file its Statement of Defence following a language change from German to English. The Court held that a language change agreed to shortly before the deadline does not constitute exceptional circumstances justifying an extension, consistent with the UPC's principle that extensions should be granted only in exceptional cases. |
| 2024-04-08 | ORD_9710/2024 | Milan LD | Generic Order | Evidence | Procedural only | Milan Local Division order on an application by Progress Maschinen & Automation AG (claimant/applicant) to access the sealed expert report from previously-executed evidence preservation proceedings (ex parte order). As no main action on the merits was commenced and the defendants did not appeal, AWM and Schnell are entitled to have the collected evidence returned to them. The order deferred return of evidence until 5 June 2024 to allow potential Court of Appeal intervention. |
| 2024-04-04 | UPC_APP_17472/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division granted FUJIFILM's request for an extension of the time period for filing its Reply to the Statement of Defence (including counterclaims for revocation) until 28 May 2024. The extension was justified because a confidentiality order under Rule 262A RoP had initially restricted FUJIFILM's employees from accessing the defendants' submissions, and the full two-month period for the reply must be available after employee access is granted. |
| 2024-04-03 | ORD_16076/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Local Division Munich issued a procedural order in the main infringement proceedings between Avago Technologies and Tesla entities concerning European Patent EP 1 838 002, addressing case management steps following the interlocutory proceedings stage. |
| 2024-04-02 | UPC_APP_12793/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | The Local Division Hamburg issued a final confidentiality order under R.262A RoP protecting Tesla's projected sales revenue figures included in its rejoinder as trade secrets, establishing a confidentiality club and restricting access to designated persons only. |
| 2024-04-02 | UPC_APP_12793/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | Hamburg Local Division (2 April 2024) issued a final confidentiality order under R. 262A RoP classifying Tesla's projected sales figures as trade secrets and restricting access to them to named representatives of Avago Technologies only. This order replaced a prior preliminary confidentiality order. |
| 2024-03-28 | UPC_APP_12137/2024 | Court of Appeal | — | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Court of Appeal (Panel 2) on an application by Curio Bioscience Inc. for restriction of access to confidential information under Rule 262A RoP. Curio sought to limit access to an unredacted document (CR-3) in the context of a pending language-change appeal. The Court held that a first-instance Rule 262A order restricting access to certain documents retains its force during appeal proceedings even if not directly challenged on appeal, and continues to govern access until the conclusion of the entire proceedings. Access to the confidential document was maintained restricted to specified persons. |
| 2024-03-28 | UPC_APP_12137/2024 | Court of Appeal | — | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (Second Panel) ruled that the confidentiality order issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division on 11 March 2024 under R. 262A RoP (restricting access to document CR-3) continues to apply in the appeal proceedings, making Curio Bioscience's separate request for a confidentiality protection order in the appeal superfluous. The existing order covers 'outside these proceedings' broadly, including the appeal. No new order needed. |
| 2024-03-27 | UPC_APP_6761/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a confidentiality order setting out principles for protection of confidential information under R.262A RoP, including the test for substantiating the confidential nature of information and the balancing of access rights against confidentiality interests. |
| 2024-03-26 | ORD_12088/2024 | Paris LD | Generic Order | Evidence | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division issued a procedural order establishing a confidentiality club under Rule 262A RoP to regulate access to trade secret information gathered during a saisie (evidence preservation) in C-Kore's infringement proceedings against Novawell. |
| 2024-03-22 | UPC_APP_14943/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division rejected the request for simultaneous interpretation of the oral hearing from German to English, holding that interpretation is only available to the extent necessary to support a party in proceedings conducted in the language of the local division. |
| 2024-03-20 | UPC_APP_11953/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Very short Munich Local Division scheduling order: sets an interim hearing for 11 September 2024 and reschedules the oral hearing from 11 July 2024 to 23 October 2024 in proceedings involving Belkin entities (case UPC_CFI_62/2023). No substantive ruling. |
| 2024-03-14 | ORD_16795/2024 | Court of Appeal | Decision By Default | Default judgment | Dismissed | The President of the Court of Appeal declared the Abbott entities' appeal inadmissible from the outset because it was brought without leave to appeal as required under Rule 220.2 RoP, and noted that an inadmissible appeal cannot be withdrawn. |
| 2024-03-14 | ORD_16788/2024 | Court of Appeal | Decision By Default | Default judgment | Dismissed | President of the Court of Appeal rejected Abbott entities' appeal as inadmissible. Abbott had filed an appeal under R. 220.2 RoP against a confidentiality order from the Paris Local Division without leave having been granted. The judge-rapporteur of the first instance had explicitly stated leave was not granted. Without leave, the appeal was inadmissible from the outset and therefore could not be withdrawn; the President declared the appeal rejected. |
| 2024-03-11 | ORD_12169/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal order correcting an error in headnote 2, paragraph 3 of a prior order (26 February 2024) concerning the interpretation of patent claims in provisional measures proceedings between 10x Genomics/Harvard (applicants) and NanoString Technologies (respondents). The correction clarifies the principles for claim scope interpretation under Art. 69 EPC: the claim is the decisive basis (not merely a guideline); description and drawings are always used as explanatory aids; the claim is to be construed from the perspective of the skilled person; the aim is to combine appropriate protection with sufficient legal certainty. |
| 2024-03-06 | UPC_APP_6758/2024 | Paris CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Order by Central Division Paris (6 March 2024) refusing a member of the public's request under R. 262.1(b) RoP for access to registry notification documents in revocation proceedings (UPC_CFI_263/2023). The court held that R. 262.1(b) covers only written pleadings and evidence lodged by parties, not administrative documents issued by the Registry. |
| 2024-03-05 | UPC_APP_7662/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division denied Edwards Lifesciences Corporation's request to convert a scheduled video-conference intermediate hearing to an in-person hearing, and also denied the court-ordered simultaneous interpretation from German into English, ruling that the claimant had voluntarily chosen German as the language of proceedings and could arrange interpretation at its own expense under R. 109.2 RoP. |
| 2024-03-03 | UPC_APP_589842/2023 | The Hague LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | A minimal document uploaded for technical (CMS) reasons only to close the workflow. No substantive content or ruling. |
| 2024-03-01 | UPC_APP_601/2024 | Paris LD | Request to review an order ex-parte | motionName.ex_parte | Dismissed | Paris Local Division (1 March 2024) dismissed Novawell's application to review and revoke the ex parte saisie (preservation of evidence) order issued on 14 November 2023 against C-KORE Systems Limited. The court upheld the saisie carried out by an expert assisted by a bailiff as lawful under French law and R. 196.5 RoP, held the 30-day review period ran from the bailiff's closing minute, and confirmed sufficient evidence of infringement existed at the time of the original order. |
| 2024-02-28 | UPC_APP_7184/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division issued a procedural order in a revocation action concerning EP3646825 (Edwards Lifesciences v Meril Italy), addressing a request by Meril to allow a subsequent amendment to the patent by Edwards, in the context of compliance with R.30 RoP requirements for patent amendment applications. |
| 2024-02-28 | UPC_APP_8330/2024 | Paris LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division order (judge-rapporteur Lignières) in infringement proceedings by ICPillar LLC against ARM Limited and numerous ARM group entities concerning EP 3 000 239. The order addresses service of the statement of claim on four UK-domiciled defendants (Arm Limited, Apical Limited, Simulity Labs Limited, SVF Holdco) through the Hague Service Convention, following failure of electronic service. The order authorises an alternative service method (R. 275.2 RoP). No substantive ruling on infringement. |