Cases
Workhorse listing across all UPC cases. Filters apply across tabs.
| Date | Case | Division | Action | Motion | Outcome | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-04-18 | UPC_APP_13022/2025 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Application by Scandit AG for 20% reimbursement of court fees following withdrawal of Hand Held Products' provisional measures application was dismissed. The CoA held that the withdrawal of the provisional measures application occurred after the closure of oral proceedings (the oral hearing had already taken place), so the 20% reimbursement threshold under R.370.9(b)(iii) RoP was not met. The provisional measures proceedings had been declared closed after Hand Held withdrew the application. |
| 2025-04-18 | UPC_APP_6597/2025 | Paris LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division partially granted LIFE365's application under R.262.1(b) RoP for access to the case file in the HP v. LAMA France proceedings. Access was granted to certain pleadings concerning the validity of the patents (statement of claim, statement of defence, claimant's reply) but only in redacted form respecting confidentiality orders. Access to infringement-related pleadings was denied as LIFE365 failed to show the cartridges were of the same origin. Access to exhibits was denied as these were publicly available from the EPO. |
| 2025-04-18 | UPC_CFI_526/2024 | Munich CD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Case management order in a revocation action. The court noted the written pleadings have been exchanged and set the further procedural steps. The claimant seeks full revocation of EP 3 767 151; the defendant seeks dismissal and, in the alternative, maintenance of the patent in amended form across 80 auxiliary requests. |
| 2025-04-18 | UPC_CFI_358/2023 | Paris LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division ruled on a third-party access request to the case file under R.262.1(b) RoP by LIFE365 (Italian companies involved in compatible printer cartridges). The Court granted partial access to certain public procedural documents (including certain memorials and prior art documents cited), but withheld documents covered by confidentiality orders and those declared inadmissible. |
| 2025-04-17 | ORD_18772/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division, with the consent of all parties, stayed the infringement and revocation proceedings against TP-Link defendants 2 to 4 under R. 295(a) RoP, pending further developments. |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_11261/2025 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Local Division Munich ruled on preliminary objections filed by BioNTech and Pfizer entities challenging UPC jurisdiction over Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccine variants sold before 1 June 2023, addressing the UPC's temporal jurisdiction in relation to the opt-out regime and the date of UPC operation. |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_17300/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division (17 April 2025) stayed the infringement and counterclaim for revocation proceedings between Atlas Global Technologies and Vantiva SA by consent of the parties pending EPO proceedings (R. 295(a) RoP). |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_18039/2025 | The Hague LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division issued a procedural order rejecting Moderna defendants' requests to extend the deadline for filing preliminary objections and the Statement of Defence under R. 333 RoP, while setting a single consolidated deadline for all Moderna group defendants to file one joint Statement of Defence in the Arbutus/Genevant v. Moderna infringement proceedings (UPC_CFI_191-192/2025). |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_16648/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | Court of Appeal (Panel 2, Rian Kalden as rapporteur) dismissed Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak GmbH, and Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH's application for suspensive effect of the Mannheim Local Division's infringement judgment of 2 April 2025 against Kodak. The Mannheim Local Division had found infringement of Fujifilm Corporation's EP 3 511 174, ordered a permanent injunction, damages, information disclosure, product destruction and recall, and EUR 300,000 interim costs. The Court of Appeal held that Kodak had not demonstrated manifest errors in the first-instance decision – the complaints about priority, prior use rights, right to be heard, proportionality of injunction, and cost allocation did not reach the threshold of manifest error on a summary assessment. The Court also addressed R. 171.2 RoP (uncontested facts), clarifying that an uncontested fact does not automatically lead to the legal consequence for which it was invoked. |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_11293/2025 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Munich Local Division order (judge-rapporteur Kupecz) deferring the preliminary objection by BioNTech and Pfizer defendants to be dealt with in the main infringement proceedings. Promosome LLC sued BioNTech/Pfizer for infringement of EP 2 401 365 (mRNA patent) via Comirnaty COVID-19 vaccines. Defendants raised a preliminary objection challenging UPC jurisdiction over acts committed before 1 June 2023. The court found the objection admissible but ordered it to be resolved in the main proceedings (R. 20.2 RoP). Jurisdiction over acts from 1 June 2023 onward was uncontested. |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_18047/2025 | The Hague LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division order on service and deadline harmonisation in parallel infringement actions by Moderna, Inc. and Moderna TX, Inc. against multiple Moderna group entities. The court declined to extend individual defendants' SoD deadlines and declined to accept informal service on U.S. entities via headquarters. Because all defendants are in the same corporate group and were found to be already aware of the statements of claim, one unified SoD deadline was set to streamline proceedings. The court inferred that attempts to avoid service at US headquarters were an attempt to delay. |
| 2025-04-17 | UPC_APP_16915/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal, acting through the standing judge, dismissed Barco N.V.'s application for suspensive effect of its appeal against a cost order made against it following dismissal of its application for provisional measures before the Brussels Local Division (UPC_CoA_329/2025). The Brussels Local Division had found jurisdiction but dismissed the provisional measures for lack of urgency and ordered Barco to bear costs up to EUR 112,000. Barco sought suspensive effect only as to the cost order. The application was dismissed as the cost order was not immediately enforceable. |
| 2025-04-16 | UPC_APP_8962/2025 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division judge-rapporteur ordered AorticLab srl (defendant/counterclaimant) to provide security for costs in favour of the claimant Emboline Inc., finding that AorticLab's own statement that it would be driven to insolvency by an injunction demonstrated a legitimate and real concern that a costs order might not be recoverable. |
| 2025-04-16 | UPC_APP_15082/2025 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order by Mannheim Local Division (UPC_CFI_471/2023, 16 April 2025) on AYLO defendants' application under R. 9.1 RoP to introduce new evidence from US PTAB proceedings showing DISH's allegedly contradictory positions on claim features of EP 2 479 680 (streaming video technology), relevant to the UPC infringement proceedings. |
| 2025-04-16 | UPC_APP_16059/2025 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order from Munich Local Division Panel 1 (Heraeus Electronics/Precious Metals v. Vibrantz GmbH, EP 3 215 288) on a time-period extension request by claimant Heraeus. The court corrected the start date of Heraeus's reply deadline to 18 March 2025 (the date the UPC representative was granted access to unredacted documents) rather than 17 March. The extension request citing confidentiality-club members' vacation was rejected: it is the free decision of members to be absent, and this cannot affect procedural deadlines. Vibrantz's request for clarification of its own deadline was addressed. |
| 2025-04-16 | UPC_CFI_539/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Request to review an order ex-parte | motionName.ex_parte | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on Siltronic AG's application for review of an ex parte preservation of evidence and inspection order (R. 197.3 and .4 RoP) obtained by Bekaert Binjiang Steel Cord Co. against Siltronic AG and Hinterberger GmbH & Co. KG concerning EP 3 212 356 B1. The court confirmed that a preservation order may encompass the seizure of delivery notes and invoices, that the list in R. 196.1 is not exhaustive, and that such measures may be used to gather evidence of individual acts of use. The court upheld the order in substance. |
| 2025-04-15 | UPC_APP_55795/2024 | Milan LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Milan Local Division dismissed Alpinestars Research's preliminary objection challenging the UPC's jurisdiction to adjudicate on infringement of European patents validated in Spain (a non-UPC contracting state). The court held, following the CJEU decision in C-339/2022, that the UPC has universal jurisdiction over European patents under Brussels I Regulation (recast) where the defendant is domiciled in a UPC member state, including for non-UPC validated patents such as in Spain. |
| 2025-04-14 | ACT_60376/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | The Düsseldorf Local Division awarded costs to Seoul Viosys following infringement and revocation proceedings (EP 3 926 698 B1), ordering each defendant to pay EUR 31,982.85 and defendant expert klein GmbH to additionally pay EUR 51,112.73 for the counterclaim for revocation. |
| 2025-04-14 | ACT_66999/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed as inadmissible the defendants' (expert e-Commerce GmbH and expert klein GmbH) application for costs assessment under R.151 RoP in infringement proceedings brought by Seoul Viosys concerning EP3223320, because the application was filed more than one month after the underlying decision of 10 October 2024. |
| 2025-04-14 | ORD_9090/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division exercised its discretion under Art.33(3)(a) UPCA to hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation jointly in the Ona Patents v Google case concerning EP2263098, finding that a joint hearing was appropriate for reasons of efficiency and enabling simultaneous decision on validity and infringement. |
| 2025-04-14 | APL_8326/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal reversed the first-instance order and granted Stadapharm access to the statement of claim and annexes filed by Accord in a now-withdrawn declaration of non-infringement action against Novartis, finding that following withdrawal of the main proceedings all parties consented and no confidentiality concerns remained apart from personal data redactions. |
| 2025-04-14 | UPC_APP_64695/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order on an application under Rule 303(2) RoP for separation of proceedings in an infringement action against Motorola Mobility and others concerning EP 3 110 072. The court exercised its discretion on whether to separate the case relating to defendant Flextronics International Europe B.V. (defendant 5) from the remaining defendants, noting that procedural economy and absence of undue prejudice are the key criteria. |
| 2025-04-14 | UPC_APP_48223/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division order in Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.'s infringement action against Aiko Energy entities and others concerning EP 3 065 184 B1 (solar panel technology). The court ordered Maxeon to provide security for the defendants' legal costs and expenses (R. 158 RoP) given Maxeon's difficult financial situation in the solar sector, finding that the risk of Maxeon being unable to pay costs outweighed Maxeon's procedural rights. The security ceiling was set at EUR 200,000 based on the EUR 2,000,000 combined value of the dispute, with allocation between defendant groups. |
| 2025-04-14 | ORD_17984/2025 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Munich Local Division procedural order (judge-rapporteur Dr. Zigann) in an infringement action by Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co. / Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co. against LONGi and other solar energy defendants concerning EP 4 372 829 (solar panel technology), addressing service issues for defendants who had not yet appointed UPC representatives. The order sets out the service status for each defendant and takes steps to ensure proper service on unrepresented defendants (including Soltech Energy GbR, which had failed to collect a Deutsche Post notification). |
| 2025-04-14 | UPC_APP_16679/2025 | Munich LD | Notice of intention to enforce (RoP118.8) | Enforcement | Procedural only | Munich Local Division procedural order (judge-rapporteur Dr. Zigann) in a separate costs/enforcement proceedings following the Edwards Lifesciences v. Meril infringement decision of 4 April 2025 (ORD_598588/2023, UPC_CFI_501/2023, concerning EP 3 669 828). Edwards notified the court of its intention to enforce parts of that decision (R. 118.8 RoP) and requested an authentic certified paper copy. The parties agreed Meril would not request a translation; the court ordered the Registry to issue an authentic paper copy to Edwards. The parties also agreed on extended timelines for Meril to comply with specific obligations. |
| 2025-04-14 | UPC_APP_64692/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Order by Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_149/2024, 14 April 2025) considering Headwater Research LLC's application to sever the proceedings against defendant 5 (Flextronics International Europe B.V.) from the four Motorola/Digital River defendants, following a correction of the identity of defendant 5. The court exercised its discretion under R. 303.2 RoP taking into account procedural economy and the delay caused to the main proceedings. |
| 2025-04-14 | ORD_16018/2025 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Munich Local Division order (judge-rapporteur Zigann) in infringement proceedings by Jinko Solar entities against LONGi and other solar companies concerning EP 4 372 829. The order addresses service on defendants domiciled outside Germany and the EU, including follow-up steps for defendants not yet served. No substantive ruling on infringement or validity. |
| 2025-04-14 | UPC_APP_15498/2025 | Munich LD | Amend Document | Procedural | Procedural only | Munich Local Division order on Syngenta's application (R. 263 RoP) for leave to amend its claim in infringement proceedings concerning a pesticide patent to extend the territorial scope of its claim to Poland, Czech Republic and the United Kingdom. Sumi Agro opposed the amendment. The order addresses the conditions for late amendment of claim and territorial expansion under R. 263 RoP. |
| 2025-04-14 | ORD_9091/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division decided, with the consent of the parties, to hear both the infringement action by Ona Patents SL against Apple Inc. (and affiliates) and Apple's counterclaim for revocation jointly, rather than bifurcating under Art. 33(3) UPCA. The court exercised its discretion under Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA in favour of joint hearing for reasons of efficiency and to ensure consistent interpretation of the patent by a single panel. |
| 2025-04-13 | UPC_APP_10549/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division procedural order in infringement proceedings by Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd. against Aiko Energy entities, Memodo GmbH, Libra Energy, VDH Solar, PowerDeal, and Coenergia concerning EP 3 065 184 (solar panel technology). The order (judge-rapporteur Thomas) addresses a confidentiality application (R. 262A RoP) filed by certain defendants seeking confidentiality protection for specific information. No substantive ruling on infringement or validity. |
| 2025-04-11 | UPC_APP_17187/2025 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division ruled on continuation of written proceedings in the 10x Genomics v. Bruker infringement action, holding that four auxiliary requests is a reasonable number under Rule 30.1(c) RoP and authorising continuation of the written procedure following the EPO Opposition Division's decision maintaining the patent in limited form. |
| 2025-04-11 | UPC_APP_16306/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division allowed GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA's withdrawal of its infringement action against Pfizer entities concerning EP 4 183 412 with the consent of all defendants, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 60% of court fees amounting to EUR 201,600. |
| 2025-04-11 | UPC_APP_16735/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | Order of Court of Appeal (Panel 2) allowing Ericsson's withdrawal of its appeal against the Local Division Munich's rejection of Ericsson's second counterclaim for revocation of EP 3 780 758 (counterclaim had been declared inadmissible as duplicative). The parties agreed each would bear their own costs. The appeal and the underlying second counterclaim for revocation were withdrawn. The court also granted 60% reimbursement of court fees. |
| 2025-04-11 | APL_9191/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Dismissed | Court of Appeal dismissed TGI Sport/Supponor's appeal against two Munich Local Division orders allowing (1) amendment of AIM Sport Vision AG's statement of claim under R. 263 RoP (to add territories including Spain and UK, and add arguments on infringement by equivalence and as intermediaries) and (2) addition of TGI Sport Virtual Limited (UK entity) as a defendant under R. 305 RoP. The Court of Appeal held that the Local Division had properly exercised its discretion within acceptable boundaries. Explanation for why amendments were not in the original pleading must be in the application body but the precise wording can be in annexes. Spain's addition was justified by the anticipation of the CJEU changing the GAT v Luk case law. The stage of proceedings was not so advanced as to tip the balance against adding TGI UK. |
| 2025-04-11 | UPC_CFI_597/2024 | Milan CD | Revocation Action | — | Procedural only | Procedural order declining EOFLOW's request to file additional written submissions in the revocation action against Insulet's patent EP 4 201 327. The court noted the stage of proceedings and that the Court of Appeal's PI decision was already known to the court. |
| 2025-04-10 | ACT_6665/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Final decision on the merits from the Düsseldorf Local Division (UPC_CFI_50/2024) delivered on 10 April 2025. The Court found that Knaus Tabbert AG infringed EP 3 356 109 B1 (product-by-process claims relating to a structural component) and granted an injunction, recall from distribution channels, definitive removal, and destruction of infringing products. The revocation counterclaim was dismissed. Provisional damages of EUR 100,000 were awarded, with further damages to be determined. The revocation counterclaim and third-party counterclaim were dismissed. Costs were apportioned 75% to Knaus Tabbert and 12.5% each to the claimants. |
| 2025-04-10 | UPC_APP_10151/2025 | Milan CD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Central Division granted ALIUD PHARMA's application for access to pleadings filed in closed proceedings between Accord Healthcare and Novartis (EP 2 501 384) under R. 262.1(b) RoP, after Novartis withdrew its objection following settlement of the main proceedings. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_17158/2025 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division considered applications by Hisense, TCL and LG defendants for separation of the infringement proceedings into three separate actions by defendant group, addressing whether confidential information disclosure justified such separation. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_11272/2025 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued an order on Promosome LLC v. BioNTech/Pfizer infringement proceedings (EP 2 401 365), addressing security for costs applications by both BioNTech/Pfizer groups. The court determined the appropriate amount of security, accepting the claimant's willingness to provide security by deposit. The court fixed the security amount based on the recoverable costs ceiling rather than the defendants' requested EUR 5,000,000. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_13218/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Application to correct a decision (R. 353 RoP) in infringement proceedings Tridonic GmbH & Co. KG v. CUPOWER entities. The correction request was partially granted: the phrase 'direkt oder indirekt' was struck from claim 7 of auxiliary requests 3, 5, 6 and 7 in the decision of 7 March 2025, as it was an obvious clerical error. The request to add attorney Alexander Bach to the heading of the decision was refused, as the named representatives were correct and there is no obligation to list all attorneys involved at any point. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_7511/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued an order on a request for public access to the register under R.262.1(b) RoP in the Dolby v. Beko/Arçelik infringement proceedings concerning the Opus Audio Codec patent EP 3 605 534, determining the scope of materials available to the public. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_CFI_846/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order on applications by BioNTech and Pfizer defendants for security for costs of EUR 5,000,000 each (total EUR 10,000,000) against Claimant Promosome LLC under Rule 158 RoP. The court considered whether Promosome's financial position gave legitimate and real concern that a costs order would not be recoverable. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_60159/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division judge-rapporteur issued a procedural order dealing with Meril's applications for cost reimbursement and confidentiality protection (R. 262A RoP) in the Edwards Lifesciences v. Meril proceedings. Following the judge-rapporteur's guidance, Meril withdrew the cost reimbursement applications. The order addressed the scope of confidentiality protection for legal fee invoices and related documents. |
| 2025-04-09 | UPC_APP_59832/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order by Munich Local Division in Edwards Lifesciences v Meril Life Sciences concerning costs and confidentiality applications arising from a third-party access-to-file application by Erik Krahbichler (KIPA AB). Following withdrawal of Krahbichler's access application, Meril applied for a costs decision. The court dismissed Meril's costs application because a costs decision from the Central Division Paris on a related matter had already been issued, and because proceedings about access applications under R. 262.1(b) do not automatically give rise to separate costs decisions. |
| 2025-04-08 | UPC_APP_61708/2024 | Milan LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | Order of the Milan Local Division dismissing a preliminary objection (Rule 19 RoP) filed by Alpinestars S.p.A. challenging the jurisdiction of the Milan Local Division over infringement of EP 4 072 364 validated in Spain. The Court held that, following the CJEU judgment in C-339/22, the UPC as court of the defendant's domicile has universal jurisdiction over infringement of European patents including those validated in non-UPC countries such as Spain. |
| 2025-04-07 | UPC_APP_8545/2025 | Milan LD | Amend Document | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division allowed Dainese's application under Rule 263 RoP to limit its claim by withdrawing all arguments related to EP 3 498 117 (following an EPO Board of Appeal limitation), while dismissing defendants' request for a costs order under Rule 265 RoP. |
| 2025-04-07 | UPC_APP_67917/2024 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division granted Dainese S.p.A. leave under R.263.3 RoP to limit its claims by excluding all arguments and requests relating to EP 3 498 117 (EP'117), following the EPO Board of Appeal limiting the scope of that patent shortly before the oral proceedings. The action continues in respect of EP 4 072 364 (EP'364) only. The Court rejected Dainese's request for partial reimbursement of court fees (EUR 12,000) as insufficiently reasoned. The defendants' request for a costs decision under R.265(2) RoP was deferred to the final decision. Key headnotes: R.263.3 RoP applies both to limitation of relief (petitum) and limitation of the cause of action (causa petendi); costs are not addressed immediately under R.263 as proceedings continue. |
| 2025-04-04 | ACT_61133/2024 | Lisbon LD | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | The Lisbon Local Division issued a costs decision following the dismissal of Ericsson's preliminary injunction application against AsusTek, Arvato, and Digital River, partially awarding travel expenses to the defendants but deferring representation costs and expert costs to the main action proceedings to avoid double assessment. |
| 2025-04-04 | UPC_APP_11625/2025 | Lisbon LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | Lisbon Local Division decision granting Ericsson's application to withdraw its infringement action against Digital River Ireland Ltd, one of two defendants in proceedings concerning EP 2 819 131, following Digital River's insolvency (winding-up order of 24 February 2025 by Irish Court). The court found no legitimate interest of Digital River in having the matter decided, held that each party bears its own costs (insolvency was a circumstance outside either party's control), and directed Ericsson to file an amended statement of claim removing Digital River from the main action. The infringement action against AsusTek Computer Inc. continues. |
| 2025-04-04 | ORD_11176/2025 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Order by Mannheim Local Division (UPC_CFI_750/2024, 4 April 2025) dismissing Samsung's preliminary objection. Samsung argued Fingon lacked material ownership to validly withdraw an opt-out and therefore the UPC lacked jurisdiction. The court held that questions of material ownership concern both jurisdiction and the merits and are not proper subjects for preliminary objections under R. 19 RoP; they must be reserved for the main proceedings. |