UPClytics

Decisions

DateCaseDivisionActionMotionOutcomeSummary
2026-01-13UPC_CFI_850/2024Mannheim LDApplication RoP262AProceduralProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division issued a further procedural order in ZTE v. Samsung addressing Samsung's request to produce a licence agreement, granting confidentiality protection under R. 262A RoP and permitting Samsung to file a further pleading on FRAND topics under R. 36 RoP.
2025-12-23UPC_CFI_850/2024Mannheim LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in ZTE v. Samsung proceedings addressing Samsung's request to produce a licence agreement and requests for further written pleadings under R. 36/263 RoP on FRAND defence, as well as scheduling of an interim conference.
2025-11-18UPC_CFI_804/2025Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyOrder of the President of the Court of First Instance granting TP-Link's application under R.323 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English. The court held that only one of the seven defendants is based in Germany, that the relevant technology field predominantly uses English, and that the need for internal coordination and technical support among defendants justified the change on grounds of fairness under Art.49(5) UPCA.
2025-10-10UPC_CFI_303/2024Munich LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsRevokedThe Munich Local Division revoked Motorola Mobility LLC's EP 3 972 309 (telecommunications patent) in full after finding added matter beyond the parent application, and dismissed the infringement action against ASUSTek, ASUS Computer GmbH and ASUSTEK (UK); costs borne by claimant Motorola.
2025-07-15UPC_CFI_302/2024Munich LDHearingProcedural onlyProcedural order scheduling an additional interim hearing on the topic of FRAND licensing on 21 July 2025, to be held in person in English, in camera (non-public), in the parallel case UPC_CFI_302/2024 and UPC_CFI_667/2024 (Lenovo v. ASUSTek).
2025-05-28UPC_CFI_189/2025Mannheim LDGeneric OrderProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division set the preliminary value in dispute at EUR 4,000,000 in Samsung Electronics' 5G SEP infringement action against ZTE entities concerning EP 4 050 804, and ordered Samsung to pay an additional advance on fees of EUR 26,000. The court found the initial estimate of EUR 500,000 greatly underestimated the value given that the action attacked all standard-essential 5G mobile devices of ZTE and had economic bearing on the broader FRAND rate dispute between the parties.
2025-02-06UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDGeneric OrderProceduralInfringedProcedural order publishing the redacted version of the substantive decision of 22 November 2024 in the infringement action (with FRAND counterclaim and invalidity counterclaim) between Panasonic Holdings Corporation and OPPO/OROPE Germany GmbH. The underlying decision (issued 22 November 2024): patent EP 2 568 724 infringed; injunction, recall, disclosure and provisional damages of EUR 250,000 ordered; invalidity counterclaim and FRAND counterclaim dismissed; defendants to bear costs; value in dispute set at over EUR 50 million.
2025-02-06UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDCounterclaim for revocationRevocation meritsInfringedThe Mannheim Local Division (Judge-rapporteur Prof. Dr. Tochtermann) published the redacted version of its decision of 22 November 2024 concerning EP 2 568 724 (SEP/FRAND). The decision found infringement by OPPO and OROPE and ordered: (I) a pan-European cease and desist; (II)–(IV) recall and destruction; (V) damages liability from 17 December 2014 (for the predecessor's rights) and from 29 July 2016 (for Panasonic); (VI) EUR 250,000 preliminary damages; (VII) residual infringement claims dismissed. The counterclaim for revocation (B) was dismissed. The FRAND counterclaim (C) was dismissed. Defendants bear the costs of the proceedings.
2025-01-27UPC_CFI_302/2024Munich LDInfringement ActionProcedural onlyProcedural order from the Munich Local Division dated 27 January 2025 issued by the judge-rapporteur setting the timetable for infringement proceedings brought by Lenovo (Singapore) against ASUSTek Computer Inc. and related entities regarding EP 3 682 587. The order schedules an interim conference via videoconference on 25 September 2025 and an oral hearing in person in Munich on 19 November 2025.
2025-01-27UPC_CFI_52/2023Munich LDApplication RoP262.1 (b)ProceduralProcedural onlyProcedural order (in German) granting patent attorney Christian Läufer of Fuchs Patentanwälte access to the written submissions and exhibits of the counterclaim for revocation proceedings (CC_581177/2023) in the case of Avago Technologies v Tesla, for professional/educational purposes. Neither party opposed. Access limited to the revocation counterclaim workflow.
2025-01-10UPC_CFI_168/2024Munich LDApplication Rop 265WithdrawnInfringement action and counterclaim for revocation (including patent amendment applications) were both withdrawn by mutual agreement of the parties pursuant to Rule 265 RoP. Both parties bear their own costs. 40% of court fees refunded to each party. Oral hearing dates cancelled.
2024-12-30UPC_CFI_168/2024Munich LDGeneric OrderProcedural onlyMunich Local Division issued a procedural order requesting the President of the Court of First Instance to reassign a new technically qualified judge to the panel, following the resignation of the previously assigned technically qualified judge Patrice Vidon.
2024-11-22ACT_545551/2023Mannheim LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsInfringedThe Mannheim Local Division found that Guangdong OPPO and OROPE Germany infringed Panasonic's EP 2 568 724 (radio communication patent), granted injunction, recall and other relief, while dismissing the invalidity counterclaim and the FRAND counterclaim.
2024-09-16UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyProcedural order from the Mannheim Local Division scheduling and structuring the oral hearing in a SEP infringement action. The order confirms hearing dates and provides guidance on the structure of oral submissions, seating arrangements, and confidentiality measures. No substantive ruling on the merits.
2024-08-30UPC_CFI_52/2023Munich LDInfringement ActionInfringement meritsNot infringedThe Munich Local Division found EP 1 838 002 B1 invalid (revoked for the territory of Germany) on the counterclaims for revocation filed by Tesla, finding the patent anticipated by prior art D3. The patent amendment requests were dismissed. The infringement action was dismissed as the patent lacks validity. Avago (claimant) bears all costs.
2024-07-09UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDGeneric applicationProceduralProcedural onlyMannheim Local Division granted an extension of deadlines for the defendants' submissions on FRAND aspects until 14 August 2024, following the conclusion of confidentiality proceedings. The extension was granted as necessary to allow for complete submissions on FRAND-related material, while taking into account that the parties were already familiar with the documents from parallel national proceedings.
2024-02-14UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division established a confidentiality regime in the Panasonic v. OPPO infringement proceedings for the production of licence agreements and confidential commercial information under Rules 190/191, 262, and 262A RoP, setting out a structured multi-step process to protect trade secrets while enabling their use in the proceedings.
2024-02-14UPC_CFI_210/2023Mannheim LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyGerman-language version of the Mannheim Local Division order establishing a confidentiality regime (Geheimnisschutzregime) in Panasonic v. OPPO, covering the same rules for the protection of licence agreement contents as trade secrets under Rules 190/191, 262, and 262A RoP.
2023-12-08UPC_CFI_219/2023Mannheim LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order addressing the validity of service of the statement of claim on Xiaomi entities domiciled in China and Hong Kong, with Panasonic Holdings arguing that service at Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH's address was effective for all group companies given their integrated corporate structure.
2023-08-25UPC_CFI_52/2023Munich LDInfringement ActionProceduralProcedural onlyThe Munich Local Division issued a preliminary order clarifying that postal handover for service purposes occurs approximately two days after the document is handed to the court's postal channel, addressing a preliminary objection deadline in Avago v. Tesla.