| 2026-02-16 | UPC_CFI_716/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Settled | Decision permitting ETRI's withdrawal of the infringement action (EP 2 258 692 B1 / EP 3 258 692 B1) against Hisense Gorenje and others following a settlement. Each party bears its own costs. 60% of court fees (EUR 14,400) reimbursed to Claimant. Value in dispute set at EUR 2,500,000. |
| 2026-02-11 | UPC_CFI_336/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a decision under R. 265 RoP on the withdrawal or termination of proceedings in case UPC_CFI_336/2024. |
| 2026-01-28 | UPC_CFI_315/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Labrador Diagnostics' infringement action concerning EP 3 756 767 against bioMérieux entities, finding no infringement after the Central Division amended the patent claims; the court was bound by the amended claim wording and validity was no longer decisive. |
| 2026-01-15 | UPC_CFI_100/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | Final decision on the merits in the infringement action by Ona Patents SL against Google Ireland Limited and others (EP 2 263 098 B1, Wi-Fi positioning patent). The court dismissed the infringement action, finding no direct infringement (the accused product did not possess every claimed component). The counterclaim for revocation was also dismissed (patent maintained as valid). Claimant to bear costs of the infringement action; 80% of counterclaim costs to defendants, 20% to claimant. Value in dispute: EUR 6,000,000 (infringement) and EUR 9,000,000 (counterclaim). Key headnotes: register governs proprietor standing; each component of a product must be present for direct infringement. |
| 2025-12-30 | UPC_CFI_648/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division allowed ETRI's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Shenzhen Transsion and related defendants. Each party bears its own costs; 60% of court fees were reimbursed to the claimant. |
| 2025-12-23 | UPC_CFI_809/2025 | Paris CD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division ruled on a preliminary objection by Robert Bosch companies challenging its jurisdiction over an infringement action by Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyages concerning EP 2 671 766 (wiper system patent). The court upheld the objection and transferred the case to the Düsseldorf Local Division, finding that the Central Division lacked competence. The language of proceedings before the Düsseldorf Local Division was set as English. |
| 2025-12-09 | UPC_CFI_432/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division permitted Headwater Research's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Apple entities and the corresponding withdrawal of Apple's counterclaim for revocation of EP 3 107 243, with no costs order by agreement of the parties. |
| 2025-10-15 | UPC_CFI_115/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Revocation merits | Partially revoked | The Düsseldorf Local Division found that the infringement action failed (patent not infringed) while partially upholding the defendants' counterclaim for revocation: the patent EP 2 755 901 B1 (egg packaging) was revoked in part, with the counterclaim otherwise dismissed. Priority, inventive step, and equivalence were the key issues. |
| 2025-10-14 | UPC_CFI_100/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a further procedural order under R. 35 and 36 RoP in the Ona Patents v Google infringement proceedings (EP 2 263 098), addressing procedural steps in the case. |
| 2025-10-13 | UPC_CFI_100/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a R. 333 RoP review order in the Ona Patents v Google infringement proceedings concerning EP 2 263 098 B1 (Wi-Fi positioning), addressing procedural aspects of the case management. |
| 2025-10-02 | UPC_CFI_496/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a rectification order correcting a clerical error in the decision of 29 September 2025 in the Headwater v Samsung proceedings concerning EP 3 110 072. |
| 2025-09-29 | UPC_CFI_496/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division recorded Headwater Research LLC's withdrawal of its infringement action against Samsung Electronics entities concerning EP 3 110 072, with 60% of court fees reimbursed as the withdrawal occurred before closure of the written procedure. |
| 2025-09-26 | UPC_CFI_315/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order under R. 108 RoP in the infringement action by Labrador Diagnostics LLC against bioMérieux entities concerning EP 3 756 767 B1 (diagnostic testing apparatus). |
| 2025-09-26 | UPC_CFI_26/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Withdrawal (RoP265) | Withdrawal | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division recorded the withdrawal by Headwater Research LLC of its infringement action (EP 3 110 069) against Samsung Electronics entities after the court had issued a decision on 30 July 2025 dismissing the infringement action and revoking the patent; both parties to bear own costs. |
| 2025-09-17 | UPC_CFI_99/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Costs only | Order from the Düsseldorf Local Division dated 17 September 2025 concerning reimbursement of court fees under R. 370.9 and R. 370.11 RoP. The infringement action (filed March 2024 by Ona Patents SL against Apple entities) and subsequently a counterclaim for revocation (filed August 2025 by Apple) were pending when the order was issued. The order deals specifically with court fee reimbursement procedural matters; no substantive ruling on infringement or validity was made. |
| 2025-09-05 | UPC_CFI_99/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted Ona Patents SL leave to withdraw its patent infringement action against Apple entities concerning EP 2 263 098 B1. Simultaneously, the defendants withdrew their counterclaim for revocation. The parties agreed that each side bears its own costs, and no cost decision was issued. The proceedings were declared closed. |
| 2025-08-06 | UPC_CFI_195/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted the claimants' request to stay infringement proceedings (and the related counterclaim for revocation) concerning EP 4 252 857 pending the outcome of the appeal against the first-instance decision in related case UPC_CFI_505/2024 (concerning EP 3 536 712). The court found that both cases involve the same factual and legal infringement questions and that a stay serves efficient use of judicial and party resources. |
| 2025-08-04 | UPC_CFI_519/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order on the handling of multiple related infringement actions and counterclaims for revocation concerning three patents, deciding on the approach under Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA before close of written procedure. |
| 2025-08-01 | UPC_CFI_100/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order requiring further written submissions from the parties in the infringement action concerning patent ownership and the presentation of exhibits. The court noted inconsistencies in the claimant's statements on patent ownership and directed supplementary presentations. |
| 2025-07-29 | UPC_CFI_336/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order in infringement action by Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd. against Aiko/Memodo/Libra/VDH Solar/PowerDeal/Coenergia entities (EP 3 065 184 B1, solar panels) on the cost ceiling under Rule 158 RoP. The court held that when a claim is brought against multiple defendants without specifying their respective liability, all defendants must have an equal opportunity to defend against the alleged infringement as a whole, and the cost ceiling should reflect the claim as brought against all defendants collectively. |
| 2025-06-16 | UPC_CFI_140/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | — | Infringed | Decision of the Düsseldorf Local Division finding that Curio Bioscience infringes EP 2 697 391 B1 owned by 10x Genomics. The court ordered: (A) cessation of the infringing acts in UPC member states; (B) recall from distribution channels; (C) permanent removal from distribution channels; (D) rendering of accounts; (E) damages for acts after 30 November 2019; (F) periodic penalty payments of up to EUR 100,000 per day. The action was dismissed in other respects. Costs: borne 30% by claimant, 70% by defendant. Value in dispute set at EUR 3,000,000; ceiling for recoverable representation costs EUR 400,000. |
| 2025-06-15 | UPC_CFI_26/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Samsung's application for security for costs against Headwater Research LLC under R. 158 RoP. The Court found that while enforcing a cost order against a US-domiciled entity might be more burdensome, the evidence showed Headwater generates recurring revenues from licensing, making the concern about non-recovery insufficiently justified. |
| 2025-05-27 | UPC_CFI_11/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a rectification order (R. 353 RoP) correcting obvious errors in the operative part of the decision issued on 8 May 2025 in the infringement action by Grundfos Holding A/S against Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump Co., Ltd. concerning EP 2 778 423 B1. The corrections addressed typographical cross-referencing errors in the accounting and rendering of accounts obligations. The defendant did not oppose the rectification. |
| 2025-01-28 | UPC_CFI_355/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | — | Revoked | Decision of the Düsseldorf Local Division dated 28 January 2025 in infringement action by FUJIFILM Corporation against Kodak entities regarding EP 3 594 009 B1 (printing plate technology). The court rejected Kodak's preliminary objection, then upheld the counterclaim for revocation, revoking EP 3 594 009 B1 in all Contracting Member States where it has effect, on grounds including added matter (Art. 123(2) EPC) and obviousness over prior art. FUJIFILM's application to amend the patent was dismissed. As a consequence, the infringement action was also dismissed. The court confirmed jurisdiction over the UK part of the patent despite the revocation counterclaim concerning the German part, applying long-arm jurisdiction principles. Costs were ordered against the claimant. Value in dispute: EUR 15,000,000 each for infringement action and counterclaim for revocation. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_CFI_459/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Decision permitting withdrawal of Valeo Electrification's infringement action against Magna PT entities (EP 3 320 602 B1) and withdrawal of Magna's counterclaim for revocation. Both parties agreed no cost applications would be made. Defendants reserved the right to apply for partial reimbursement of court fees. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CFI_355/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order rejecting and disregarding Defendants' (Kodak entities) further written submissions filed on 28 November 2024 because no reasoned request was made and no leave was granted by the judge-rapporteur for further submissions pursuant to Rule 36 RoP. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CFI_355/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order granting the Claimant's request for simultaneous interpretation from English to Japanese at the oral hearing scheduled for 17-18 December 2024, issued pursuant to Rule 109.1 RoP. |
| 2024-10-10 | UPC_CFI_483/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | — | Revoked | Düsseldorf Local Division revoked EP 3 223 320 for Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands based on the counterclaim for revocation, finding the patent was invalid due to added matter (Art. 138(1)(c) EPC / Art. 123(2) EPC). The infringement action was dismissed as a result. Seoul Viosys (claimant) was ordered to bear all costs. |
| 2024-09-13 | UPC_CFI_11/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Early procedural order by Düsseldorf Local Division in Grundfos v Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump deciding under R. 37.2 RoP to proceed jointly with infringement action and counterclaim for revocation under Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA. The decision was taken early to allow timely assignment of the technically qualified judge given part-time panel staffing constraints. |
| 2024-08-30 | UPC_CFI_99/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Düsseldorf Local Division dated 30 August 2024 on confidentiality protection (R. 262A RoP) in infringement proceedings brought by Ona Patents SL against Apple entities. The order addresses the protection of trade secrets, specifically ruling that negative facts (the statement that products do not support certain functionalities) can also be subject to confidentiality. The names of employees involved in the relevant technical matters were also included within the confidentiality order. |
| 2024-08-12 | UPC_CFI_281/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Settled | Decision from Düsseldorf Local Division dated 6 August 2024 permitting Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. to withdraw its patent infringement action against Amazon Services Europe S.à r.l. regarding EP 3 339 920 B1. The withdrawal was agreed following an out-of-court settlement. Each party bears its own costs and Seoul Semiconductor bears the court fees. The claimant was ordered reimbursement of 60% of court fees (EUR 6,600) pursuant to R. 370.9(b)(i) RoP. |
| 2024-08-08 | UPC_CFI_140/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order on a confidentiality club application (Rule 262A RoP) in proceedings involving 10x Genomics v Curio Bioscience. The court set rules for access to confidential information, including access for named party representatives and their teams, with responsibility for maintaining confidentiality. |
| 2024-07-12 | UPC_CFI_363/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Procedural order on a request for court-provided simultaneous interpretation. The court held that where a party's representatives master one of the permitted languages of the local division, court-provided interpretation is not available merely because the claimant chose a different permitted language in which those representatives are less proficient. The party may arrange its own interpreter at its own cost. |
| 2024-06-27 | UPC_CFI_457/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order in Dolby International's HEVC-SEP infringement action against HP entities concerning EP 3 490 258 B1. The order addressed an extension of time for Dolby's reply brief necessitated by a confidentiality protection application (R. 262A) over HP's FRAND licence negotiation submissions. The court held that where a R. 262A application temporarily prevents the claimant from consulting Access Advance (the pool administrator), a full time extension—not merely a partial one—may be granted where it does not prejudice the oral hearing date. |
| 2024-01-16 | UPC_CFI_373/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The President of the Court of First Instance granted Aarke AB's application to change the language of the Düsseldorf infringement proceedings from German to English (the language in which EP1793917 was granted), finding a significant imbalance between the parties given Aarke's status as a smaller Swedish company and considerations of fair access to justice. |
| 2023-12-19 | UPC_CFI_201/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division clarified that the deadline for Nutricia's defence to the counterclaim for revocation and patent amendment application is 20 December 2023, per Rule 29.1 RoP (duplicate version of the same order). |
| 2023-12-19 | UPC_CFI_201/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order pursuant to Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA and Rule 37.2 RoP, deciding to proceed jointly with both the infringement action brought by Nutricia and the counterclaim for revocation filed by Nestlé Health Science, rather than bifurcating the proceedings. |
| 2023-12-14 | UPC_CFI_201/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division clarified, at Nutricia's request, that the deadline for filing a defence to the counterclaim for revocation and any application to amend the patent is 20 December 2023 (two months after service of the defence with counterclaim on 20 October 2023), per Rule 29.1 RoP. |
| 2023-12-04 | UPC_CFI_363/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division issued a procedural order under Rules 302.1 and 302.2 RoP concerning possible bifurcation or severance of issues in an infringement action by Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. against expert e-Commerce GmbH and others, involving EP 3 926 698 B1 and EP 3 223 320 B1. |
| 2023-12-01 | UPC_CFI_7/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division decided under Rule 37.2 RoP to proceed with infringement and validity issues together (Article 33(3)(a) UPCA) in the patent dispute between Franz Kaldewei GmbH & Co. KG and Bette GmbH & Co. KG concerning EP 3 375 337 B1. |
| 2023-11-22 | UPC_CFI_260/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division decided under Rule 37.2 RoP (before close of written proceedings) to proceed with both the infringement claim and the invalidity counterclaim together (Article 33(3)(a) UPCA), finding joint hearing efficient and beneficial given the moderate technical complexity and the overlap between the validity and infringement issues. |