| 2025-01-30 | UPC_CFI_359/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Pre-trial order of Mannheim Local Division in FUJIFILM v Kodak (EP 3 476 616) setting out preliminary views and questions from the judge-rapporteur in advance of the oral hearing. The order identifies key issues on claim construction, novelty and inventive step (prior art: WO 379, US 952, EP 452, JP 021, EP 408) and directs the parties' attention to specific technical questions requiring focused argument at the hearing. |
| 2025-01-22 | UPC_CFI_365/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a preparatory procedural order ahead of the oral hearing in a patent infringement action brought by Fujifilm against Kodak entities concerning EP 3 511 174. The order set out preliminary views and questions on contested legal and technical points, including cross-border relief for the UK, interpretation of main vs. subsidiary requests, and claim construction, without making any final substantive ruling. |
| 2025-01-10 | ACT_578697/2023 | Paris LD | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Paris Local Division issued a costs decision in Hewlett-Packard Development Company LP v LAMA FRANCE (UPC_CFI_358/2023, infringement action concerning EP 2 089 230 and EP 1 737 669). Applying the prior decision of 13 November 2024 (50/50 cost split), the court rejected both parties' requests to raise the 50% ceiling on recoverable representation costs. Each party owes the other EUR 112,000 in representation costs and EUR 7,500 in court fees, resulting in a wash. No ceiling uplift was justified despite the complexity of the double-patent case. |
| 2024-12-20 | UPC_CFI_541/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | — | PI granted | Order from the Mannheim Local Division dated 20 December 2024 granting provisional measures requested by G. Pohl-Boskamp GmbH & C. KG against pharma-aktiva GmbH, ALDI SÜD, ALDI Nord, ALDI SE, and Hofer KG (Austria) for alleged infringement of EP 1 993 363 B1 (a composition for combating ectoparasites). The provisional measures order prohibits defendants from manufacturing, offering, distributing, using, importing or stocking the infringing products in Germany (defendants 1–4) and Austria (defendants 1 and 5). A penalty of EUR 100 per item non-compliance was imposed. The respondents were also ordered to surrender products in their possession. Defendants were ordered to pay a preliminary cost reimbursement of EUR 11,000 jointly. The measures are effective immediately and will lapse if Syngenta does not commence main proceedings within 31 calendar days / 20 working days from 20 December 2024. |
| 2024-11-22 | ACT_545551/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | The 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. |
| 2024-11-13 | UPC_CFI_358/2023 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Final decision on the merits (in French) in the infringement action by Hewlett-Packard Development Company LP against LAMA France concerning inkjet printer cartridge technology. The Paris Local Division found that LAMA France infringed the patent in suit (a fluid ejection device patent). The court ordered: (I) patent maintained as valid (invalidity counterclaim rejected); (II) injunction against infringing cartridges; (III) corrective measures including recall from distribution channels and destruction of infringing stock; (IV) disclosure of sales information for damages calculation; (V) costs split equally between parties (50/50); provisional damages on costs rejected. Infringement established without requiring prior notice of the patent to the defendant. |
| 2024-10-20 | UPC_CFI_471/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order on a request for disclosure of information about the configuration and coding scheme of video files (Rule 191 RoP). The court declined to order disclosure at this stage due to the uncertain validity of the patent, finding it would be disproportionate to require defendants to provide the requested technical information before validity is established. |
| 2024-09-16 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural 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. |
| 2024-07-09 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim 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. |
| 2024-05-06 | UPC_CFI_440/2023 | Paris LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | Order of the Paris Local Division (full panel) on several procedural applications filed by Photon Wave Co. Ltd. (intervener/third party supporter of defendant Laser Components SAS) and Seoul Viosys Co. Ltd. (claimant) in an infringement action concerning EP 3 404 726. The court: (1) held that Photon Wave had not filed its revocation brief within the deadline set for the party it supports, and rejected its application for extension of that deadline; (2) rejected Photon Wave's request to change the language of proceedings from French to another language, holding that neither the nationality of a party's representative nor of the intervener justifies a language change; (3) rejected Photon Wave's request for an autonomous revocation brief on the basis that an intervener cannot develop claims contrary to those of the party it supports; (4) rejected Seoul Viosys's request for postponement of its reply deadline. |
| 2024-04-30 | UPC_CFI_218/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued an order in Panasonic Holdings Corporation's infringement action against Xiaomi entities concerning EP 3 096 315, ruling on a production of licence agreements application (R. 190 RoP). The court ordered disclosure of certain licence agreements (with redactions permitted for irrelevant passages) where the parties holding those agreements had not provided valid reasons to refuse consent to production. |
| 2024-03-14 | UPC_CFI_440/2023 | Paris LD | Generic application | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order (in French) granting Laser Components SAS an extension of the deadline for filing its Statement of Defence in the infringement action brought by Seoul Viosys. The extension was granted due to technical difficulties experienced by the third-party intervener (Photon Wave Co.) in the CMS system and the anticipated filing of a separate invalidity counterclaim requiring coordination. |
| 2024-02-27 | UPC_CFI_440/2023 | Paris LD | Generic Order | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division refused the defendant Laser Components SAS's request to change the language of proceedings from French to English (the language in which the patent was granted) in Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd v Laser Components SAS. The Court applied R. 322 RoP and Art. 49.4 UPCA, finding that while the plaintiff is Korean and chose French, the defendant is a French company based in France, and neither the representative's nationality nor a forced intervenor's nationality constitutes sufficient grounds of convenience or equity to justify a language change. The request was therefore rejected. |
| 2024-02-22 | UPC_APP_597898/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order in MED-EL v. Advanced Bionics, denying the defendants' application to refer the infringement proceedings to the Central Division and deferring the question of a stay of infringement proceedings pending parallel Central Division revocation proceedings to a later stage, after the full written procedure is complete. |
| 2024-02-14 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The 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. |
| 2024-02-14 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | German-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. |
| 2023-12-18 | UPC_CFI_358/2023 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division issued a procedural order in an infringement action brought by Hewlett-Packard against Lama France, addressing Lama's requests regarding access to exhibits that were unreadable via the CMS and seeking an extension of the deadline to file its statement of defence. The order dealt exclusively with case management and access to documents. |
| 2023-12-08 | UPC_CFI_219/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The 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. |