| 2025-05-08 | ACT_3186/2025 | Lisbon LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI denied | Lisbon Local Division denied Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH's application for a preliminary injunction against Zentiva Portugal, LDA concerning EP 1 830 843 (nintedanib for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis). The court found no imminent infringement: Zentiva's receipt of marketing authorisations and filing of a parallel exclusivity period (PEP) request did not demonstrate that market entry was imminent before patent expiry. The PEP request was filed in the usual course of business and the Defendant was aware of the risk of PEP expiry. Value of case set at EUR 1,000,000. |
| 2025-05-08 | ACT_2097/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Düsseldorf Local Division final decision in infringement action (with revocation counterclaim) concerning a pump patent (EP 2 778 423 B1), by Grundfos against a Chinese manufacturer (Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump). The court found infringement, granted an injunction, ordered accounting/information, recall from distribution channels, and declared liability for damages from 28 February 2018. The revocation counterclaim was dismissed. Defendant bears all costs. The court addressed the admissibility of new prior art raised for the first time in the defendant's rejoinder to the revocation counterclaim, holding that such new attacks require a convincing explanation of why they could not have been included earlier. |
| 2025-05-08 | UPC_CFI_716/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order granting Claimant Polidoro S.p.a. a one-week extension to 19 May 2025 for filing its Reply to the Statement of Defence and Defence to the Counterclaim for Revocation. Extension justified because access to the unredacted version of the Statement of Defence was delayed under Rule 262A RoP. |
| 2025-05-08 | UPC_CFI_582/2024 | Brussels LD | Generic application | — | Dismissed | The Brussels Local Division dismissed Yealink's application for rectification (R. 353 RoP) of the Final Order of 21 March 2025, which had dismissed Barco's application for provisional measures and ordered Barco to pay Yealink's costs up to the EUR 112,000 ceiling. Yealink sought to clarify the order by adding the word 'interim' to the costs award, but the court found no clerical error, miscalculation or obvious omission warranting rectification. The court confirmed that the costs award of EUR 112,000 against Barco (the unsuccessful party in the provisional measures) was already clearly an interim award on the face of the Final Order. |
| 2025-05-08 | UPC_CFI_145/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Procedural order in consolidated Sanofi v. Accord Healthcare / Dr Reddy's / betapharm infringement proceedings at Munich Local Division. The judge-rapporteur declined to dispose of the case summarily and determined it would be more efficient to await the outcome of pending EPO Board of Appeal proceedings concerning the patent before deciding difficult substantive issues at an oral hearing. |
| 2025-05-08 | UPC_CFI_145/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Procedural order from Munich Local Division dated 8 May 2025 (unredacted version) in the consolidated infringement proceedings of Sanofi against Accord Healthcare, Stada, Dr. Reddy's and Zentiva regarding EP 2 493 466. The order sets the timetable for further proceedings, confirms the interim conferences (including one focused on EPO BoA appeal outcome on 17 July 2025), and sets the main interim conference for 12 September 2025 and oral hearing dates for 14–17 October 2025. The order also addresses outstanding procedural issues including Zentiva's request to strike Malta from the revocation request, and provides guidance on the panel's preliminary views on damages calculation and infringement. |
| 2025-05-02 | ACT_15774/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Interim procedure closure order in 10x Genomics, Inc. v. Curio Bioscience Inc. at Düsseldorf Local Division (EP 2 697 391 B1). Directions for the oral hearing were issued including: (1) translation of claim motions into English; (2) guidance on publication/media order requirements (Art. 80 UPCA); (3) clarification of 'such as' wording in supporting documents request; (4) parties to submit cost estimates (R. 104(k) RoP); (5) parties may upload hearing aids. Interim procedure closed. |
| 2025-05-02 | UPC_CFI_86/2025 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Order from the President of the Court of First Instance dated 2 May 2025, under R. 323 RoP, changing the language of proceedings in Mannheim Local Division case UPC_CFI_86/2025 to the language of the patent (as applied for by The Walt Disney Company entities as defendants). The order sets out principles on language change: the possibility of changing to the patent language does not conflict with the claimant's initial choice; the defendant's position is decisive when the balancing of interests is equal; and since the claimant has flexibility in choosing where to file, the language of the patent is generally not unfair to the claimant. |
| 2025-05-01 | APL_64374/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI granted | The Court of Appeal set aside the Milan Central Division's refusal of provisional measures and granted Insulet a pan-European preliminary injunction against EOFlow's insulin pump device ('EOPatch'/'GlucoMen Day Pump'), finding infringement of EP 4 201 327 and awarding costs to Insulet. |
| 2025-04-30 | ACT_561734/2023 | Hamburg LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | The Hamburg Local Division dismissed AGFA NV's infringement action against Gucci entities finding that the accused leather goods did not infringe EP 3 170 670 (a patent concerning inkjet-decorated leather), specifically because the ivory-coloured base coat did not constitute a perfect achromatic colour as required by the patent claims; it also dismissed the defendants' counterclaim for revocation. |
| 2025-04-28 | UPC_CFI_319/2024 | Milan LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Order from the Milan Local Division dated 28 April 2025 on R. 262A RoP applications filed by ASUSTek Computer Inc., Arvato Netherlands B.V. and Digital River Ireland Ltd. in infringement proceedings (and related counterclaim for revocation) brought by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson regarding EP 3 076 673. The court ruled on access restrictions for the 'Asustek Confidential Documents', limiting access to specified representatives, one licensing/valuation expert, and one designated company representative, subject to strict confidentiality obligations. |
| 2025-04-28 | UPC_CFI_318/2024 | Milan LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division (Judge-Rapporteur) issued an order in the infringement action by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson against ASUSTek Computer, Arvato Netherlands and Digital River Ireland concerning EP 3 076 673. The defendants' applications under R. 262A and R. 262.2 RoP sought confidential treatment ('external eyes only') for certain Asustek documents in both the main action and the related counterclaim for revocation. The court ruled on the conditions for granting an 'external eyes only' regime, finding it available in cases of proven risk of conflict between the patent system and antitrust law. |
| 2025-04-24 | ACT_588685/2023 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Paris Local Division found that Laser Components SAS infringed EP 3 404 726 owned by Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd., ordered corrective measures including withdrawal and destruction of infringing UV-C LED chips from the French market, and directed disclosure of information for damages calculation, while reserving the quantum of damages for a separate procedure. |
| 2025-04-23 | UPC_CFI_537/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application RoP262A | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order granting Nintendo's request for confidentiality protection (Rule 262A RoP) of sales data in their Statement of Defence. Access to unredacted information restricted to two named reliable persons on the Claimant's side, subject to conditions. Claimant's request for access for two specific employees was accommodated. |
| 2025-04-23 | UPC_CFI_452/2024 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | The Nordic-Baltic Regional Division declared proceedings closed following the mutual withdrawal of Viking Arm AS's infringement action and Stanley Black & Decker's counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 3 953 541. Both parties consented to each other's withdrawal and agreed that no cost decision was required. |
| 2025-04-23 | UPC_CFI_471/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Pre-trial procedural order from the Mannheim Local Division in an infringement action concerning EP 2 479 680 (adaptive bitrate streaming), confirming the oral hearing date and identifying key contested issues, including claim construction of the HTTP streaming method claims, direct and equivalent infringement, and the defendant's invalidity counterclaim. The order is preparatory and contains no substantive ruling. |
| 2025-04-22 | UPC_CFI_476/2024 | Milan CD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Milan Central Division allowed Pfizer's withdrawal of the revocation action and the counterclaim for revocation concerning GlaxoSmithKline's EP 4 183 412 (RSV vaccine patent), allowing GSK to withdraw its corresponding patent amendment application. Proceedings were declared closed. Each party bears its own costs. The request for 60% court fee reimbursement was allowed. |
| 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 | 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_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. |
| 2025-04-15 | 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 | 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. |
| 2025-04-11 | 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. |
| 2025-04-09 | 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. |
| 2025-04-08 | 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_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 | UPC_CFI_501/2023 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | — | Infringed | Infringement action by Edwards Lifesciences Corporation against Meril GmbH, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd, and Meril Italy S.r.l. concerning transcatheter heart valve (Myval THV) and EP 3 669 828. The court found infringement, dismissed the invalidity counterclaim (patent valid), and ordered: injunction, recall, seizure and destruction, disclosure of sales data, provisional damages of EUR 663,000, publication of decision in five media outlets. Decision immediately and directly enforceable from date of service. Key headnotes: jurisdiction for multiple defendants with commercial relationship; problem-solution approach for inventive step; cease-and-desist without penalty clause insufficient. |
| 2025-04-03 | UPC_APP_8203/2025 | Mannheim LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Order by Mannheim Local Division (UPC_CFI_819/2024, 3 April 2025) dismissing preliminary objections by Hisense, TCL and LG defendants in Corning's infringement action for EP 3 296 274 (glass sheets in LCD TVs). Defendants argued as distributors they had no knowledge of the manufacturing process and that three separate infringement forms could not be tried in one action (Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA). The court rejected these arguments. |
| 2025-04-03 | UPC_CFI_846/2024 | Munich LD | Procedural Order | — | Procedural only | Procedural order on defendants' application (Rule 190 RoP) for production of detailed experimental materials and raw data underlying an expert report submitted by the claimant. The court ordered disclosure of additional supporting data and methodology to enable the defendants to assess the accuracy and reliability of the claimant's test results. |
| 2025-04-02 | UPC_APP_13067/2025 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division rejected Ascendis Pharma's preliminary objection to jurisdiction in the infringement action brought by BioMarin Pharmaceutical concerning EP 3 175 863 (C-Type Natriuretic Peptide variants for achondroplasia treatment). The court found that the opt-out withdrawal was effective and that sufficient acts of infringement were alleged in Germany. |
| 2025-04-02 | ACT_579338/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that the Kodak defendants infringed EP 3 511 174 B1 owned by FUJIFILM Corporation, ordered an injunction, recall and destruction of infringing products, information disclosure, and an interim award of EUR 300,000 toward legal costs; the defendants' counterclaim for revocation was dismissed. |
| 2025-04-02 | ACT_578818/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Revoked | The Mannheim Local Division fully revoked European patent EP 3 476 616 in Germany and dismissed the infringement action brought by FUJIFILM against Kodak entities. The application to amend the patent was also dismissed. The court held that the patent was entirely invalid due to lack of novelty/inventive step in the German territory. No injunction was granted. Claimant was ordered to pay EUR 300,000 as interim award on legal costs. The value in dispute was set at EUR 15,000,000. |
| 2025-04-02 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Infringement merits | Infringed | The Mannheim Local Division found that Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, and Kodak Holding GmbH infringed EP 3 511 174 (relating to printing plate technology) owned by FUJIFILM. The defendants were ordered to cease infringement, provide information, destroy infringing products, recall products from commerce, and pay FUJIFILM EUR 300,000 as an interim award on legal costs. The counterclaim for revocation was dismissed. The value of the dispute was set at EUR 15,000,000. |
| 2025-04-02 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division separated and ordered independent proceedings for claims and counterclaims relating to the UK national part of European patent EP 3 511 174, following the ECJ's judgment in C-339/22 (BSH Hausgeräte) regarding UPC's jurisdiction under Brussels Ia Regulation. The Court acted after awaiting the ECJ decision which was delivered after the oral hearing. |
| 2025-04-01 | UPC_CFI_614/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Munich Local Division confirmed withdrawal of Mann+Hummel GmbH's application for provisional measures against Sotras S.R.L. concerning EP 2 762 219 following an out-of-court settlement. The court declared the proceedings closed, agreed that no costs application would be made, and ordered 60% reimbursement of court fees to Mann+Hummel. |
| 2025-04-01 | UPC_CFI_499/2024 | The Hague LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Hague Local Division rejected the defendant's application for re-establishment of rights under R. 320 RoP after missing the deadline for filing a statement of defence, finding the representative had not exercised due care given the specific circumstances of the case. |
| 2025-03-31 | UPC_CFI_412/2023 | Paris CD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Paris Central Division rejected BMW's application to rectify an order of 9 January 2025 to add a costs provision relating to an application to set aside a default judgment. The court held that the failure to address costs in the operative part could not be corrected under Rule 353 RoP (rectification of obvious slips) because costs for the set-aside application are not a separate decision on the merits but ancillary to the main default proceedings, and any costs claim must be pursued in the separate costs determination procedure. |
| 2025-03-28 | UPC_CoA_170/2025 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (standing judge) issued a procedural order partially granting Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG's request for an extension of the 15-day deadline to file its response to ILME GmbH's appeal against the Munich Local Division's rejection of ILME's preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP). The extension was granted for 10 days (instead of the requested three weeks), balancing efficiency with Phoenix's need to respond to complex arguments. |
| 2025-03-26 | APL_31428/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Costs only | The Court of Appeal issued an order on costs distribution after a patent revocation action became moot because the patent holder surrendered the patent; the Court established that an exception to the loser-pays rule applies where the patent owner surrendered immediately at the outset of proceedings without prior provocation. |
| 2025-03-26 | UPC_CoA_290/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | — | Costs only | The Court of Appeal dismissed Stäubli's appeal against the Paris Central Division's cost order in a revocation action in which the patent holders surrendered their patent after proceedings commenced. The Court upheld an equitable exception to the general rule (Art. 69(1) UPCA) that the unsuccessful party bears costs: where a claimant files a revocation action without the patent holder giving cause, and the patent holder surrenders the patent immediately at the outset and concurrently files a revocation request with the EPO under Art. 105a EPC, the claimant may bear the costs. The Court applied equity because the patent holders had announced timely surrender and completed formalities only 8 days late without causing extra costs. |
| 2025-03-21 | UPC_APP_10014/2025 | Paris LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Paris Local Division rejected Mul-T-Lock France's preliminary objection challenging UPC jurisdiction over infringement of national (non-unitary) designations of EP 4 153 830 in Spain, the UK and Switzerland, confirming the UPC's competence to hear infringement of all national parts of the patent within UPC Member States. |
| 2025-03-21 | UPC_CFI_582/2024 | Brussels LD | Application for provisional measures | — | PI denied | The Local Division Brussels dismissed Barco's application for provisional measures against Yealink due to lack of urgency. Barco had waited an unreasonably long period before filing, having been aware of the allegedly infringing products since at least May 2023. Barco was ordered to pay Yealink's costs up to EUR 112,000. Dispute value set at EUR 1,000,000. |
| 2025-03-18 | UPC_APP_47532/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Munich Local Division (Panel 2) dismissed Roku's preliminary objection under R. 19.1(a) RoP, rejecting arguments based on alleged incompatibility of the UPCA with EU primary law and ECHR, and confirming jurisdiction based on plausible allegations of infringement in Germany. |
| 2025-03-18 | UPC_APP_45195/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division dismissed Roku's preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) in the infringement action brought by Dolby International AB, rejecting arguments that (i) the UPCA is incompatible with EU primary law, (ii) Art. 47(2) EU Charter / Art. 6(1) ECHR is violated, and (iii) the Munich Local Division lacks territorial jurisdiction. The court confirmed that incompatibility of the UPCA with EU law is not a valid ground under R. 19.1 RoP, and that for jurisdiction purposes it suffices that the claimant credibly alleges an infringing act in Germany. |
| 2025-03-18 | UPC_APP_47531/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_254/2024) dismissing Roku's preliminary objection under R. 19.1(a) RoP against Sun Patent Trust's infringement action concerning EP 2 903 267. The Court ruled that: (1) alleged incompatibility of the UPCA with EU primary law is not a valid ground for preliminary objection; (2) a preliminary objection cannot be based on a violation of Art. 47(2) EU Charter or Art. 6 ECHR; (3) proof of the representative's authority for the opt-out withdrawal need not be included with the statement of claim unless challenged; and (4) for jurisdiction, only a plausible allegation of infringement is required. |
| 2025-03-18 | ACT_59975/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural scheduling order in Adeia Guides Inc. v. The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V. et al. at Munich Local Division (EP 2 793 430). The panel decided to hear both infringement and counterclaim for revocation jointly. Interim conference set for 4 December 2025; oral hearing scheduled for 15 January 2026. Parties summoned. Written procedure to end 10 September 2025. |
| 2025-03-17 | UPC_APP_66363/2024 | Hamburg LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Hamburg Local Division (UPC_CFI_169/2024) on a preliminary objection by MediaTek challenging international jurisdiction. The Court dismissed the objection, confirming UPC jurisdiction under Art. 31 UPCA and Art. 71b(2) Brussels-Ia Regulation, holding that the UPC has jurisdiction for all patent infringements committed in a UPC Member State regardless of the defendant's domicile. |