| 2025-12-01 | UPC_CFI_337/2025 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Central Division (Section Munich) judge-rapporteur issued a Rule 105.5 interim conference order in the revocation action concerning EP 3 296 274, setting procedural timetable, case valuation, and directions for further submissions including responses to an expert opinion. |
| 2025-11-28 | UPC_CoA_376/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal 237 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI denied | The Court of Appeal set aside paragraph 3 of the Brussels Local Division's order of 21 March 2025, which had denied Barco's application for provisional measures against Yealink. The appeal concerned the competence of the Brussels Local Division and the proper handling of an application for provisional measures, including referral to the competent division (R. 19.5 RoP applied mutatis mutandis). The Court also addressed interim cost awards in provisional measures proceedings: Barco, as the unsuccessful applicant for provisional measures at first instance, was ordered to bear Yealink's costs. An interim costs award up to half the applicable ceiling was granted to Yealink on appeal. |
| 2025-11-28 | UPC_CFI_619/2025 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division issued a procedural order under R. 302 RoP addressing a procedural step in proceedings before the court. |
| 2025-11-28 | UPC_CFI_449/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI granted | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted a preliminary injunction against Zhuhai ouguan Electronic Technology (Defendant 1) for infringement of HP's printer-related patents EP 2 826 630 B1 and EP 3 530 469 B1 (ink cartridges), after service was deemed good and the defendant failed to file an objection; penalty payments of up to EUR 250,000 per day ordered. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CoA_904/2025 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (Panel 1a: Grabinski, Gougé, Blok) rejected VIVO's request for stay of the first-instance proceedings (UPC_CFI_362/2025 and UPC_CFI_361/2025) pending the appeal on the preliminary objection (R. 21.2 RoP) concerning EP 3 407 524 and EP 3 852 468. The court found no exceptional circumstances justifying a stay: the unresolved jurisdictional question did not constitute exceptional circumstances, and the costs of preparing VIVO's defence were insufficient. Sun Patent's interest in obtaining a timely decision outweighed VIVO's interest in avoiding preparation costs. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CFI_936/2025 | Mannheim LD | Request Rop115 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division denied Amazon's request for a full transcript of an audio recording of the oral hearing in InterDigital v. Amazon preliminary injunction proceedings, ruling that R. 115 RoP does not permit full transcripts, especially where confidentiality regimes are in place and the transcript could be distributed in foreign jurisdictions. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CFI_530/2025 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Paris Local Division rejected all preliminary objections raised by the defendants (Adobe, OpenAI, Truepic, JDF Projects and C2PA) in KEEEX's infringement action. The court upheld the jurisdiction of the UPC and the internal competence of the Paris Local Division under Art.33.1(a) UPCA, finding that infringing acts alleged in France established competence. Defendants were ordered to file their statements of defence by 2 January 2026. Costs deferred to the merits decision. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CoA_70/2025 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Withdrawn | Court of Appeal accepted withdrawal of STRABAG's appeal (UPC_CoA_70/2025) following an out-of-court settlement between STRABAG and SWARCO. The intervenor Chainzone's separate appeal (PC_CoA_001/2025) was declared moot under R.360 RoP, as an intervenor cannot continue an appeal that the supported party has withdrawn. Chainzone bears its own costs. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CFI_613/2024 | Milan CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Patent maintained | The Milan Central Division dismissed Pari Pharma's revocation action against Philips' nebulizer patent EP 3 397 329 (unitary effect), upholding the patent after finding the prior art combinations relied upon by the claimant do not render the invention obvious to the skilled person. |
| 2025-11-27 | UPC_CFI_613/2024 | Milan CD | Revocation Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Central Division (full panel: Postiglione, Klein, Callewaert) rectified an obvious slip in its final decision of 27 November 2025 in the revocation action brought by Pari Pharma GmbH against Koninklijke Philips N.V. concerning EP 3 397 329. The decision had incorrectly stated that the patent is registered with unitary effect; this sentence was deleted. The parties did not object. |
| 2025-11-26 | UPC_CFI_806/2025 | Brussels LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Brussels Local Division procedural order (R. 19 RoP, second order) in Barco v. Yealink infringement proceedings. Yealink raised a preliminary objection to territorial competence of the Brussels Local Division under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA. The Court had already held it had territorial competence in related PI proceedings (UPC_CFI_582/2024). Order sets out how the preliminary objection will be handled in the main infringement proceedings. |
| 2025-11-25 | UPC_CoA_529/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Revoked | The Court of Appeal decided appeals in a revocation action and a counterclaim for revocation concerning PCSK9 antibody patents. Based on the reasoning visible in the excerpt, the Court found that the patent lacked inventive step because the skilled person at the priority date could not reasonably predict whether an antibody targeting secreted PCSK9 would result in a therapeutically effective treatment for hypercholesterolaemia; the prior art (Lagace, Horton, Cunningham) contained only conditional suggestions. The appeals concerned claim interpretation, added matter, sufficiency, and inventive step in the context of medical use-format claims. The operative decision is not fully visible in the excerpt but the substantive reasoning strongly indicates revocation. |
| 2025-11-25 | UPC_CoA_464/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Patent maintained | The Court of Appeal dismissed the Meril companies' appeals against the revocation and counterclaim revocation decisions and Edwards' appeal against the infringement decision, upholding the patent EP 3 646 825 (heart valve). Key rulings: (I–VIII) All revocation and counterclaim appeals rejected; Meril bears 60% of Edwards' costs in the revocation proceedings and Edwards bears 40% of Meril's costs. (IX–X) The infringement decision was partially set aside: the injunction and preliminary damages order do not extend to XL devices (30.5mm and 32mm) that had not been scheduled for implantation in a patient by 15 November 2024. Preliminary damages reduced to not exceed €363,000 for Meril India and Meril Germany. The value of the proceedings is €8,000,000. |
| 2025-11-24 | UPC_CoA_911/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Dismissed | Court of Appeal dismissed Suinno's application for suspensive effect of its appeal (related to costs decisions made against Suinno by the Paris Central Division following a default decision dismissing Suinno's infringement action against Microsoft). The CoA held that Suinno had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances nor that the impugned costs decisions were manifestly erroneous. |
| 2025-11-21 | UPC_CFI_829/2024 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Central Division (Munich) issued an order following the interim conference under Rule 105.5 RoP in UPM-Kymmene's revocation action against International N&H Denmark ApS, setting the case value at EUR 1,000,000 and confirming the oral hearing date of 15 January 2026. |
| 2025-11-20 | UPC_CFI_836/2024 | Munich CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Partially revoked | The Munich Central Division partially revoked EP 4 019 790 B1 for 17 Member States in revocation proceedings brought by BAUSSMANN against Raimund Beck, upholding the patent only as amended per Auxiliary Request III (with claims 5 and 6 unchanged), and dismissing the remaining revocation claim; costs were split 70/30 in favour of the claimant. |
| 2025-11-20 | UPC_CFI_351/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division granted Canon's application for a further round of written pleadings under R. 36 RoP against Katun, to address the EPO Opposition Division's preliminary opinion and additional test purchases of allegedly infringing toner cartridge products. |
| 2025-11-19 | UPC_CFI_87/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on InterDigital's application for a further round of written pleadings under R. 36 RoP against Disney entities in a video streaming patent case concerning EP 2 449 782. |
| 2025-11-19 | UPC_CFI_802/2024 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Milan Local Division issued a default judgment against the defendants (Gastroteam Abbe AB and Marciuliano Attrezzature) for infringement of Morello Forni's patent rights, ordering an injunction and information disclosure regarding the 'Pizza Former' machine, as defendants failed to participate in proceedings. |
| 2025-11-18 | UPC_CFI_804/2025 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Order 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. |
| 2025-11-18 | UPC_CFI_187/2024 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | The Hague Local Division decided in proceedings on infringement and counterclaim for revocation concerning Advanced Cell Diagnostics' RNAscope technology patents (EP 1 910 572 and EP 2 500 439) against Molecular Instruments; the decision addressed novelty, inventive step, and infringement of in situ hybridisation method claims. |
| 2025-11-17 | UPC_CFI_858/2025 | Lisbon LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Lisbon Local Division (judge-rapporteur Rute Lopes) rejected Zentiva Portugal's preliminary objection challenging UPC jurisdiction over Boehringer Ingelheim's infringement action concerning EP 1 830 843 (nintedanib for treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis). The Court held that the action is an Art. 32(1)(a) UPCA infringement action based on an administrative notice (INFARMED No. 0689/2024) creating a threat of infringement, and UPC jurisdiction is properly established. Zentiva's additional argument (no demonstrated acts of manufacture etc.) was held to be a substantive merits defence outside the scope of R. 19 RoP. |
| 2025-11-17 | UPC_CFI_541/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | Procedural | Withdrawn | The Düsseldorf Local Division permitted the claimant to withdraw the infringement action against Defendant 2 (Wizart LLC) under R. 265.1 RoP after Defendant 1 asserted that Wizart LLC was a non-existent entity; the statement of claim had not yet been served on Defendant 2. |
| 2025-11-13 | UPC_CFI_321/2025 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | The Hague Local Division recorded the withdrawal of AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC's infringement action against Troy Chemical and Azelis entities concerning EP 3 286 270, with 60% of court fees reimbursed (€96,600) and certain documents declared confidential pursuant to R. 262.2 RoP. |
| 2025-11-13 | UPC_CFI_321/2025 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Withdrawn | Duplicate of the Hague Local Division decision recording AdvanSix's withdrawal of the infringement action against Troy Chemical and Azelis entities (EP 3 286 270), with 60% court fee reimbursement and confidentiality order. |
| 2025-11-12 | UPC_CFI_837/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division panel dismissed the defendants' application under R. 333.1 RoP to review the judge-rapporteur's order refusing to extend deadlines for filing rejoinder and related submissions in the American Wave Machines v. Surftown wave-machine patent case. |
| 2025-11-11 | UPC_CFI_515/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division deemed service of the HP preliminary injunction application on Shenzhen Moan Technology Co. (Defendant 2) to be good service under R. 275.2 RoP, after the Chinese central authority failed to process the Hague Convention request for several months. |
| 2025-11-11 | UPC_CFI_771/2025 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division reviewed a confidentiality order (R. 333 RoP) and upheld admission of Solvay's employee to the confidentiality club in the fluoropolymer infringement proceedings, finding that employment within the claimant's economic unit was sufficient grounds for admission. |
| 2025-11-07 | UPC_CoA_900/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Dismissed | Court of Appeal (judge-rapporteur) rejected Lepu Medical's application for suspensive effect of its appeal against a preliminary injunction granted by the Hamburg Local Division in favour of Occlutech. The CoA held that Lepu failed to demonstrate that the impugned order contained manifest errors or that the appeal would become devoid of purpose without suspensive effect. Lepu's claim that enforcing the injunction would damage its reputation was insufficient to outweigh Occlutech's interest in preventing imminent patent infringement. |
| 2025-11-07 | UPC_CFI_1041/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Düsseldorf Local Division ruled on Micron's application to extend procedural deadlines (preliminary objections and statement of defence) in a large-scale YMTC v. Micron patent infringement campaign, partially granting extended deadlines. |
| 2025-11-07 | UPC_CoA_579/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI denied | Court of Appeal allowed OTEC's appeal and set aside the first-instance order granting provisional measures to STEROS. The CoA found the appeal successful and ordered that STEROS's application for provisional measures be rejected. STEROS was ordered to bear the costs of both the first-instance and appeal proceedings. |
| 2025-11-07 | UPC_CoA_579/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (Panel 1a: Grabinski, Gougé, Blok, Meewisse, Schmidt) partially granted STEROS GPA Innovative S.L.'s application for rectification (R. 353 RoP) of the Court of Appeal's order of 7 November 2025 which had set aside the Hamburg Local Division's provisional measures grant and rejected the application for provisional measures concerning EP 4 249 647. The court corrected a clerical mistake in margin 45 (Table 1 changed to Table 10), but rejected STEROS' further argument that margin 43 contained an 'obvious slip' since the proposed change would affect the substance of the reasoning. |
| 2025-11-06 | UPC_CFI_723/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | Düsseldorf Local Division procedural order in Align Technology's application for provisional measures against Angelalign. The order addresses Angelalign's request for security for costs under R. 158.1 RoP based on Align Technology's US domicile and assesses whether enforcement of a cost order would be unduly burdensome. This order was issued before the final provisional measures order of 12 February 2026. |
| 2025-11-06 | UPC_CFI_1443/2025 | Hamburg LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI granted | Hamburg Local Division granted ex parte provisional measures (preliminary injunction) against Fileder Filter Systems Sp. z o.o. (Poland) for infringement of Brita SE's EP 2 131 940 B1 (water filter device with locking shaft). The injunction covers Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and Slovenia. Security of EUR 50,000 and provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 34,700 ordered. |
| 2025-11-06 | UPC_CoA_897/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | Procedural | Dismissed | The Court of Appeal dismissed Black Sheep Retail Products' application for suspensive effect of an appeal against the Hague Local Division's infringement decision (10 October 2025), which found EP 2 432 351 valid and infringed and ordered BSRP to disclose information to HL Display. The Court held that suspensive effect is the exception, not the rule, and that enforcement of information orders may only be suspended in exceptional circumstances. No such exceptional circumstances (manifest error, or appeal becoming devoid of purpose) were shown. BSRP failed to establish that providing the information would cause irreparable harm. |
| 2025-11-05 | UPC_CoA_762/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Revoked | Court of Appeal decision (English) – duplicate/related filing to UPC_CoA_773/2024. Same substantive outcome: Seoul Viosys's LED patent claims 1, 4, 5, 6, and 9 revoked for added matter; all infringement claims dismissed; Viosys ordered to bear costs of both instances. |
| 2025-11-05 | UPC_CoA_762/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Revoked | German-language version of the Court of Appeal decision (UPC_CoA_762/2024 and 773/2024) in Seoul Viosys v expert. Claims 1, 4, 5, 6 and 9 of the LED patent revoked for added matter. All infringement claims dismissed. Viosys ordered to bear all costs for both instances. |
| 2025-11-05 | UPC_CoA_773/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Revoked | Court of Appeal decision (English) on the appeal in the counterclaim for revocation and the related infringement action concerning Seoul Viosys's EP (LED patent, EP 698). The CoA found added matter in claim 1 of the patent (content extended beyond the earlier application as filed, particularly regarding embodiments with a single mesa). Claims 1, 4, 5, 6 and 9 revoked. Infringement action dismissed. Viosys ordered to pay expert's costs for both appeal and first instance proceedings. Key headnotes: court may raise added matter of its own motion; translation of international application governs content; patentee must demonstrate inaccuracy of its own translation. |
| 2025-11-05 | UPC_CFI_461/2024 | Hamburg LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Hamburg Local Division correction order (R. 353 RoP) correcting several errors in the judgment of 5 November 2025 in Dolle v. Fakro concerning EP 2 476 814 B1. Corrections included party representative name, address, patent claim reference number errors, and addition of the defendants' counterclaims relating to conditional auxiliary requests. |
| 2025-11-05 | UPC_CFI_461/2024 | Hamburg LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Hamburg Local Division found that Fakro entities infringed Dolle A/S's European Patent EP 2 476 814 B1 (roof window with priority claim). The Court granted an injunction, recall of infringing products, removal from distribution channels, provision of information and damages assessment deferred. Fakro's counterclaim for revocation was rejected. The Court confirmed that 'the same invention' in Art. 87 EPC is interpreted by the direct-and-unambiguous disclosure standard. |
| 2025-11-03 | UPC_CFI_662/2025 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Dismissed | The Mannheim Local Division rejected the preliminary objection (R.19 RoP) filed by multiple Geely group defendants challenging the jurisdiction and competence of the Mannheim Local Division. The Court found it had jurisdiction under Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA over all defendants as they are members of the same corporate group, share business relations as required, and face the same infringement allegation regarding the same patent claim. The Court also established that the requirement of a 'business relationship' under Art.33(1)(b) UPCA does not require complete identity of infringing acts but merely that the accused acts are aligned in purpose. The infringement action on the merits continues. |
| 2025-11-03 | UPC_CFI_104/2025 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Central Division Paris issued a procedural order under R. 340 RoP joining the counterclaim for revocation from the Munich Local Division to the pending revocation action before the Central Division Paris, to avoid contradictory decisions on EP 3 812 870. |
| 2025-11-03 | UPC_CFI_666/2024 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division issued a post-interim-conference order in Adeia Guides v. Walt Disney entities (EP 1 969 839, electronic programme guide patent), setting out decisions on scheduling and procedural steps following the interim conference. |
| 2025-10-31 | UPC_CoA_755/2025 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | Procedural | Dismissed | Court of Appeal dismissed Vivo's request to stay the first-instance proceedings (UPC_CFI_361/2025 and UPC_CFI_263/2025) and extend time limits pending the appeal proceedings. The CoA held that R.21.2 RoP (stay in context of preliminary objection appeal) cannot be applied by anticipation before an appeal against the preliminary objection order has been lodged. Under R.295 RoP, the CoA is generally not the appropriate body to decide on stays of first-instance proceedings, as the CFI is better placed to manage its own case. |
| 2025-10-31 | UPC_CFI_630/2025 | Dusseldorf LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI denied | The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed the application for provisional measures filed by Occultech GmbH against Lepu Medical (Europa) Cooperatief U.A. and others concerning EP 1 998 686 B2. The court found that the requirements for a preliminary injunction were not met (infringement not established with sufficient certainty), and ordered the applicant to bear the costs. The case value was provisionally set at EUR 1,000,000. |
| 2025-10-30 | UPC_CFI_361/2025 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Dismissed | The Paris Local Division (full panel: Lignieres, Kupecz, Gillet) rejected Vivo's preliminary objection challenging UPC jurisdiction and the internal competence of the Paris Local Division in Sun Patent Trust's SEP/FRAND infringement action concerning EP 3 852 468. The Court held that UPC jurisdiction is established under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA because an allegedly infringing Vivo product was offered and delivered to a French customer via Fnac.com, constituting a harmful event in France. Vivo's additional argument that only a FRAND defence (not a FRAND main claim) falls within UPC jurisdiction was deferred to the main proceedings under R. 20.2 RoP. |
| 2025-10-30 | UPC_CFI_362/2025 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Preliminary objection (R.19 RoP) decided by the Paris Local Division. The court rejected the jurisdictional challenge raised by Vivo (that the UPC lacks jurisdiction over an active FRAND determination request as the main claim), holding that the UPC has jurisdiction to hear the infringement action including FRAND aspects, and that the Paris Local Division is internally competent under Art.33.1(a) UPCA on the basis of alleged infringing sales in France. The preliminary objection was deferred/rejected and the case proceeds on the merits. |
| 2025-10-30 | UPC_CoA_8/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | The Court of Appeal (Panel 1b: Grabinski, Gougé, Germano, Checcacci, Wilhelm) ordered Bhagat Textile Engineers to provide security for costs of EUR 19,000 (50% of the applicable ceiling) within 10 days in the appeal against the Milan Local Division's infringement judgment concerning EP 2 145 848. The court rejected Oerlikon's request for security regarding first-instance costs already awarded (as those are a matter of enforcement). Security was justified by Bhagat's financial difficulties, the non-enforceability of UPC orders in India, and Bhagat's explicit acknowledgment that it cannot pay the first-instance costs. |
| 2025-10-30 | UPC_CoA_8/2025 | Court of Appeal | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | Italian-language version of the Court of Appeal order (Panel 1b) ordering Bhagat Textile Engineers to provide security for costs of EUR 19,000 in the appeal concerning EP 2 145 848. Identical substance to the English version: security ordered based on Bhagat's financial difficulties and non-enforceability of UPC orders in India. Request for security covering first-instance costs rejected. |
| 2025-10-29 | UPC_CFI_743/2025 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the President of the Court of First Instance granting Skechers' application under R.323 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English. The court held that all Skechers subsidiaries except one are based outside Germany, that the group's internal working language is English, and that conditions of enforcement of any future judgment were of lesser relevance than the parties' coordination needs during proceedings. |