Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-06 | UPC_CoA_813/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI granted | The Court of Appeal extended the provisional measures (preliminary injunction) granted against Dreame International, Teqphone GmbH, and Dreame Technology AB to cover Dyson's 'New Dreame Products' and 'Newest Dreame Products' (EP 3 119 235, vacuum cleaner patent). The Court held that: (1) a structural element in a claim must be interpreted considering both its function and physical configuration; (2) the fact that an infringer has previously committed only certain infringing acts does not restrict an injunction to those specific acts – the existence of past infringement establishes a risk of all acts of use; (3) the date for R. 213.1 RoP compliance was set at 31 calendar days after service. |
| 2026-03-06 | UPC_CoA_813/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal referred a question to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on whether an 'authorised representative' under EU product safety regulations (Regulations 2023/988 and 2019/1020) can be enjoined as an 'intermediary' for patent infringement purposes under Art. 9(1)(a) of Directive 2004/48. The case arises from Dyson's appeal against Hamburg Local Division's refusal to grant provisional measures against Eurep GmbH, the EU authorised representative of Dreame International. |
| 2026-02-25 | UPC_CFI_1927/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division issued a preliminary procedural order scheduling an oral hearing in the provisional measures proceedings by Ottobock against BrainPortfolio Inc. and BrainRobotics Inc. for 22 April 2026. The order set filing deadlines for the parties' written submissions in preparation for the hearing and invited parties to notify participants. This is a case management order with no substantive ruling on the merits. |