Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-27 | UPC_APP_7184/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on Meril Italy's application to refuse admission of Edwards Lifesciences' subsequent request to amend patent EP 3 646 825, addressing the admissibility of post-deadline patent amendment requests under R.30(2) RoP. |
| 2024-02-27 | UPC_APP_7184/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on Meril Italy's application to refuse admission of Edwards Lifesciences' subsequent request to amend patent EP 3 646 825, addressing the admissibility of post-deadline patent amendment requests under R.30(2) RoP. |
| 2024-02-27 | UPC_APP_7364/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order by Central Division Paris (27 February 2024) on Meril Italy's application for a further round of written pleadings in the revocation action UPC_CFI_255/2023 concerning EP 3 646 825 (transcatheter heart valve). The court considered whether to exercise its discretion under R. 36 RoP to allow additional pleadings in response to new priority-related defence arguments raised in the defendant's rejoinder. |
| 2024-02-26 | ORD_10103/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal ruled that AIM Sport's appeal (lodged as APL_596892/2023) against a first-instance decision dismissing the actions due to patent opt-out was filed out of the two-month time limit under R.220.1(c) RoP and was therefore inadmissible. |
| 2024-02-26 | UPC_APP_6601/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal of the UPC refused to stay the provisional measures appeal proceedings despite NanoString's Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the US. The court held that even if the insolvency threshold under R. 311.1 RoP was met, no stay was warranted where the oral proceedings were already concluded and the case was ready for decision, balancing procedural economy and cost efficiency under Art. 41(3) UPCA. |
| 2024-02-26 | UPC_APP_6601/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal order declining to stay the provisional measures appeal proceedings following NanoString's insolvency (Chapter 11 bankruptcy under US law). The Court held that under R. 311(1) RoP, proceedings need not be stayed when a party is declared insolvent after the close of oral argument if the case is ready for decision, as principles of procedural economy, cost-efficiency and a fair balance between party interests (Art. 41(3) UPCA) support proceeding to judgment. US Chapter 11 proceedings qualified as insolvency under the applicable lex fori concursus. |
| 2024-02-22 | ORD_7587/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division decided, under R. 37.2 and Art. 33(3) UPCA, to hear Panasonic Holdings Corporation's infringement action and OPPO's counterclaims for revocation and FRAND licence together before the same panel, finding joint adjudication efficient and consistent with uniform claim interpretation. |
| 2024-02-22 | ORD_7453/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in the early stages of the Panasonic v. Xiaomi infringement proceedings concerning EP 2 568 724, addressing scheduling and procedural matters. |
| 2024-02-22 | ORD_7452/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Mannheim Local Division exercising discretion under Rule 37.2 RoP (Article 33(3) UPCA) to hear the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation (including a FRAND licence counterclaim) together in the same proceedings. The panel decided that joint hearing of the infringement and invalidity claims is efficient and substantively advantageous. |
| 2024-02-22 | ORD_7585/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division order in Panasonic vs Xiaomi infringement proceedings (EP 2 207 270) addressing case management under R. 37.2 RoP read with Art. 33(3) UPCA. The order concerns procedural organisation of the case involving multiple Xiaomi entities and related proceedings. |
| 2024-02-20 | UPC_APP_8391/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Central Division Paris seat granted Roche Diabetes Care GmbH's request for an extension of the time period for filing the defence to revocation in the pending revocation action concerning EP 2 196 231, pending a decision on the preliminary objection to jurisdiction. |
| 2024-02-20 | UPC_APP_8392/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Paris Central Division (judge-rapporteur) granting Roche Diabetes Care GmbH's application for extension of the deadline for filing its defence in a non-infringement declaration action brought by Tandem Diabetes Care (EP 2 196 231). Roche had filed a preliminary objection disputing jurisdiction which had not yet been decided; it argued it would be unreasonable to finalise a defence that might become unnecessary. The court extended the deadline to 8 April 2024, finding the extension was justified to await the preliminary objection decision, particularly given the parallel revocation action pending before the same court. |
| 2024-02-13 | UPC_APP_586761/2023 | The Hague LD | Generic application | Costs | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division rejected Arkyne Technologies' (Bioo) application under Rule 158 RoP requiring Plant-e to provide security for legal costs, finding that the financial strain a cautio would impose on the claimant (a competing SME with limited finances) would be a serious impediment to access to justice, and also noting that Dutch national law does not permit security for costs against EU-domiciled claimants. |
| 2024-02-12 | UPC_APP_588685/2023 | Paris LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division granted Laser Components SAS's application for forced intervention (joinder) of its LED chip supplier Photon Wave Co. Ltd in the Seoul Viosys v. Laser Components infringement proceedings, finding it useful and necessary for the third party to be bound by the court's decision. |
| 2024-02-12 | UPC_APP_5858/2024 | Paris LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division issued a procedural order in ICPillar LLC v. ARM group, granting ICPillar's application for an alternative method of service (Rule 275.1 RoP) on Arm Poland Sp. z.o.o. via French bailiff, after registered letter service had failed, while confirming that service was otherwise successfully effected on the remaining ARM defendants. |
| 2024-02-12 | UPC_APP_5858/2024 | Paris LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Paris Local Division (UPC_CFI_495/2023) concerning an alternative method of service under R. 275.1 RoP. The Court addressed the applicant ICPillar's request to serve its Statement of Claim on Arm Poland via a French bailiff and by registered letter. The Court clarified that alternative service is only authorised where service could not otherwise be effected, and that a 10-day delay from sending a registered letter to a Hague Convention Central Authority does not constitute a failure of service. |
| 2024-02-09 | UPC_APP_4285/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Paris Central Division on an application for extension of the time period to file the statement of defence filed by ITCiCo Spain S.L. The Court considered the application of Rule 9(3) RoP discretionary time extension powers, applying principles of proportionality, flexibility, fairness and equity. A time extension was sought due to illness of the previously appointed patent attorney. |
| 2024-01-25 | no order number559935/2023 - application processed in hardcopy only (outside CMS) | Hamburg LD | Determination of damages and compensation | motionName.damages | Procedural only | The Hamburg Local Division panel rejected Fives ECL's application under Rule 333 RoP to have the full panel review the judge-rapporteur's decision sustaining the defendant's objection (Einspruch), finding the review application inadmissible because that type of decision by the judge-rapporteur granting an objection is not subject to panel review under Rule 333 RoP. |
| 2024-01-20 | UPC_APP_2249/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in Seoul Viosys v. expert e-Commerce, rejecting the defendants' application for an extension of the deadline to file their statement of defence and counterclaim for revocation, applying the strict UPC time limits regime. |
| 2024-01-19 | UPC_APP_1714/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in Dolby v. HP entities, rejecting the defendants' application for an extension of the deadline to file their statement of defence, citing the strict time limits regime under the UPC Rules of Procedure and the absence of exceptional circumstances justifying an extension over the claimant's objection. |
| 2024-01-18 | UPC_APP_100/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Court of Appeal (single judge) on an application by Meril GmbH and Meril Life Sciences for suspensive effect of their appeal against the Munich Local Division's costs order in the Edwards Lifesciences provisional measures proceedings (EP 3 763 331, crimping device for heart valve prostheses). After Meril submitted a cease-and-desist undertaking accepted by Edwards, the provisional measures action became devoid of purpose. The first-instance court ordered Meril to bear costs up to EUR 200,000 and set the value at EUR 1,500,000. Meril sought suspensive effect of the costs portion of the appeal. |
| 2024-01-18 | UPC_APP_100/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Signed version of the order of the Court of Appeal (single judge) on Meril's application for suspensive effect in the Meril v. Edwards Lifesciences appeal (EP 3 763 331, crimping device). This appears to be an earlier or signed copy of the same order as the previous file (Anordung aufschiebende Wirkung Meril-Edwards EN.pdf), issued on 18 January 2024 and concerning the same application for suspensive effect of Meril's appeal against the first-instance costs order. |
| 2023-12-28 | UPC_APP_588681/2023 | Munich CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Central Division issued a preliminary order in a Rule 262.1(b) access-to-file application by Mathys & Squire LLP, deciding to await the outcome of pending Court of Appeal proceedings on a related access application before ruling on the present request. |
| 2023-12-04 | UPC_APP_584786/2023 | Milan LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted a Rule 262.1(b) RoP request by an anonymous third-party applicant for public access to the case file in the evidence preservation proceedings (UPC_CFI_287/2023) concerning EP 2 726 230, involving Progress Maschinen & Automation AG, AWM S.R.L., and Schnell S.P.A. |
| 2023-12-04 | UPC_APP_584786/2023 | Milan LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted a Rule 262.1(b) RoP request by an anonymous third-party applicant for public access to the case file in the evidence preservation proceedings (UPC_CFI_287/2023) concerning EP 2 726 230 (duplicate of companion order). |
| 2023-11-17 | UPC_CFI_274/2023 | Hamburg LD | Determination of damages and compensation | motionName.damages | Dismissed | The Hamburg Local Division dismissed Fives ECL's action for determination of damages based on a prior national court judgment (Landgericht Düsseldorf), holding that the UPC lacks jurisdiction under Article 32 UPCA to assess damages that were not preceded by a UPC infringement action; a national patent enforcement judgment cannot found UPC damages jurisdiction. |
| 2023-11-14 | UPC_CFI_397/2023 | Paris LD | Application for preserving evidence pursuant to RoP192 | Evidence | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division granted an ex parte order for preserving evidence against Novawell, allowing C-Kore Systems Limited to obtain a detailed description and seizure of the allegedly infringing SICOM product, which is alleged to reproduce the claims of EP 2 265 793 covering subsea test apparatus. |
| 2023-11-06 | UPC_APP_584588/2023 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Court of Appeal standing judge granted suspensive effect (6 November 2023) to Ocado Innovation Limited's appeal against a Nordic-Baltic Regional Division order granting a third party access to Ocado's statement of claim. The suspensive effect prevents access to the document pending adjudication of the appeal on the merits. |
| 2023-10-22 | UPC_APP_49415/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | Hamburg Local Division granted requests for production of documents under R.190/333 RoP in the context of an abuse of rights defence. The panel ordered claimants to produce specific internal documents relevant to an alleged abuse of rights objection raised by defendant Vizgen, including email correspondence and deposition transcripts from related US proceedings. |
| 2023-10-18 | UPC_APP_552740/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a final order imposing a penalty payment (Zwangsgeld) for non-compliance with a prior injunction order against Revolt Zycling AG, concerning EP 2 546 134 B1. The court set out principles for calculating penalty payments, including that the debtor's past conduct and willingness to comply are key factors. |
| 2023-09-25 | UPC_CFI_286/2023 | Milan LD | Application for preserving evidence pursuant to RoP192 | Evidence | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted an ex parte order to inspect premises and preserve evidence against AWM S.R.L. and Schnell S.P.A., allowing Progress Maschinen & Automation AG to gather evidence of alleged infringement of EP 2 726 230, which covers a method and device for continuously producing a lattice girder. |
| 2023-09-22 | UPC_APP_559862/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 33 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in an infringement action concerning EP 2 359 858, involving service and scheduling matters between N.V. Nutricia and Nestlé Health Science (Deutschland) GmbH. |
| 2023-09-21 | UPC_CFI_329/2023 | Brussels LD | Application for preserving evidence pursuant to RoP192 | Evidence | Procedural only | The Brussels Local Division granted an ex parte order to preserve evidence and carry out a description under Rule 192 RoP, directed at OrthoApnea S.L., in respect of patent EP 2 331 036 covering a device for treating night-time breathing problems. No substantive infringement ruling was made. |
| 2023-06-14 | UPC_CFI_141/2023 | Milan LD | Application for preserving evidence pursuant to RoP192 | Evidence | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted Oerlikon Textile's evidence preservation order against Bhagat Group under Rules 192 ff. RoP, ordering collection of technical and commercial documents from Bhagat's stand at the ITMA trade fair in Milan. |
| 2023-06-13 | UPC_CFI_127/2023 | Milan LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted Oerlikon Textile's application to preserve evidence against Himson Engineering under Rules 192 ff. RoP, ordering collection of technical and commercial documentation from Himson's stand at the ITMA trade fair in Milan. |
| 2023-06-13 | UPC_CFI_127/2023 | Milan LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division standing judge declined to treat Oerlikon's evidence preservation request as extremely urgent and referred it to the presiding judge, as the ITMA trade fair still had one day remaining and an ordinary urgent decision was feasible. |