| 2025-03-13 | UPC_CFI_665/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a scheduling order in the Adeia Guides v Walt Disney Company patent infringement proceedings (EP 2 793 430), setting dates for interim conference and oral hearing, and proceeding with both infringement action and counterclaim for revocation. |
| 2025-03-11 | ACT_17336/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Mannheim Local Division ordered a separation of proceedings under Rules 302.1, 303.2 and 340.2 RoP, splitting off claims related to Poland, Spain, Turkey, and the UK pending guidance from the ECJ (Case C-339/22) on international jurisdiction under the Brussels Ia Regulation. |
| 2025-03-11 | ACT_17365/2024 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Mannheim Local Division procedural order in infringement proceedings by Hurom Co., Ltd. against NUC Electronics Co., Ltd. concerning EP 2 028 981. Following the ECJ's decision in C-339/22 (BSH Hausgeräte) on international jurisdiction under Brussels Ia Regulation, the panel ordered separation of proceedings: a partial decision will be issued on national parts for which jurisdiction is established, while the question of jurisdiction over non-EU defendants is separated for further consideration after the parties can comment on the ECJ ruling. No substantive infringement decision issued. |
| 2025-03-11 | UPC_CFI_201/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Order from Munich Local Division dated 11 March 2025 on procedural matters arising from a preliminary injunction dispute between Syngenta and Sumi Agro. The panel upheld the judge-rapporteur's earlier order dismissing Sumi Agro's application to revoke provisional measures (which had been granted on 27 August 2024). The panel held that Syngenta had filed and paid court fees for the main proceedings in time to satisfy R. 213(1) and R. 15(2) RoP, confirming that payment does not require receipt by the court before the deadline, only that the fee was paid. Syngenta's application for re-establishment of rights was also dismissed as unfounded. Leave to appeal was granted given the fundamental interpretive issues involved. |
| 2025-03-11 | UPC_CFI_159/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Infringement merits | Infringed | Hurom's patent EP 2 028 981 (slow juicer) was found infringed by NUC Electronics Europe GmbH and WARMCOOK. An injunction was granted covering France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Denmark and Romania. Defendants were ordered to pay damages (amount to be determined), provide information, destroy/recall infringing products, and pay EUR 56,000 in interim legal costs. The court also addressed the intertemporal application of UPCA substantive law to acts committed before and after 1 June 2023. Partial dismissal of remaining requests. Value in dispute set at EUR 675,000. |
| 2025-03-07 | ACT_590302/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | Düsseldorf Local Division full merits judgment in an infringement action by Tridonic GmbH & Co KG against CUPOWER entities concerning EP 2 011 218 B1 (a patent relating to LED driver/control circuits). The court dismissed the infringement action in its entirety, finding that the accused LED power supply products do not fulfil feature 7.4 of the patent (decoupling element) because the capacitor C3 in the defendants' design does not achieve the complete electrical separation required by the claim – it remains continuously connected to the control unit regardless of switch state. The defendants' counterclaim for revocation was also dismissed (patent maintained). Costs were split: claimant bears costs of the infringement action; defendants bear costs of the revocation counterclaim equally. |
| 2025-03-04 | APL_51115/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI granted | Order by the Court of Appeal (UPC_CoA_523/2024, 3 March 2025) dismissing Sumi Agro's appeal and upholding the preliminary injunction granted by the first instance in favour of Syngenta for EP 2 152 073 (crop protection). The CoA found the patent more likely than not valid and infringed, extended the injunction to Romania following its UPCA accession, reversed the first-instance costs decision and ordered Sumi Agro to bear all costs at first instance and on appeal. The CoA also held that a cost decision must be issued in inter partes PI proceedings. |
| 2025-03-03 | UPC_CoA_805/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Withdrawn | The Court of Appeal (Panel 1b: Grabinski, Gougé, Germano) permitted Curio Bioscience's withdrawal of its appeal (APL_65956/2024) against the Düsseldorf Local Division's order requiring Curio to provide security for costs of EUR 200,000 in the infringement action by 10x Genomics concerning EP 2 697 391. 10x Genomics did not object to the withdrawal. Proceedings declared closed; no cost decision needed. |
| 2025-03-03 | UPC_CFI_164/2024 | Paris CD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | The Central Division Paris ordered claimant Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy to appoint a new patent-qualified representative to replace its existing representative who lacked the requisite independence required under UPC rules. The court granted a period for compliance and required ratification of prior acts. The defendant's request to reject the infringement action as manifestly inadmissible was deferred pending the claimant's compliance. |
| 2025-03-03 | UPC_CFI_54/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Procedural order issued by the Munich Local Division following the Interim Conference of 28 February 2025 in two consolidated infringement actions by Headwater Research LLC against Samsung. The order addressed procedural matters including inadmissibility of Samsung's invalidity attack under Art. 138(1)(e) EPC, the standing-to-sue issue, treatment of a witness statement, and admissibility of late-filed documents ZP8-ZP9. No substantive ruling on infringement or validity. |
| 2025-02-28 | UPC_CFI_312/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Patent amended | Decision on the revocation action by NJOY Netherlands B.V. against Juul Labs International Inc. concerning EP 3 504 989 (vaping/e-cigarette device). The court maintained the patent in amended form (Auxiliary Request 1, filed 22 July 2024) with effect for Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The patent as granted was found invalid. Each party bears its own costs since both parties partially succeeded. |
| 2025-02-24 | UPC_CoA_540/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI denied | Court of Appeal rejected Biolitec's appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division's refusal to grant a preliminary injunction. The CoA upheld the first-instance order, finding that Biolitec had not demonstrated the necessity of provisional measures: proceedings on the merits could be awaited; the status quo on the market had existed for years before the patent was granted; and Biolitec failed to demonstrate sufficient evidence of urgency regarding stocking or tender-related harm. Biolitec was ordered to bear the costs of the appeal proceedings. |
| 2025-02-24 | UPC_CoA_540/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI denied | German-language signed version of the Court of Appeal order rejecting Biolitec's appeal in the provisional measures proceedings against Light Guide Optics and SIA LIGHTGUIDE International. Identical in substance to the English version: appeal rejected, Biolitec ordered to bear costs. The provisional injunction was denied because proceedings on the merits could be awaited and necessity was not demonstrated. |
| 2025-02-21 | ACT_61342/2024 | Hamburg LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI denied | The Hamburg Local Division dismissed Teleflex Life Sciences II LLC's application for provisional measures against Speed Care Mineral GmbH regarding hemostatic wound-care products, because Teleflex failed to demonstrate with sufficient certainty that the attacked embodiment contained a 'binder' as required by the patent claims, and the burden of proof was not reversed. |
| 2025-02-21 | UPC_CoA_618/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | — | Costs only | The Court of Appeal addressed procedural issues regarding court fees for an appeal concerning a cost-fixing application, including a request for default judgment and a request for leave to appeal a cost decision under Rule 221 RoP. The order concerned the admissibility of a cost-fixing appeal following earlier proceedings in which the Munich Local Division had denied VusionGroup's preliminary injunction request and ordered costs. |
| 2025-02-19 | UPC_CFI_112/2025 | Munich LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | Permanent injunction | The Munich Local Division granted Nokia Technologies and related entities an ex parte anti-anti-suit injunction (AASI) against Shanghai Sunmi Technology entities, prohibiting them from pursuing proceedings before a Chinese court in Kunming seeking to prevent Nokia from enforcing its standard-essential patents at the UPC. |
| 2025-02-19 | ACT_7940/2024 | Hamburg LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Not infringed | Hamburg Local Division final decision in infringement action (with revocation counterclaim) concerning a patent for reducing latency in wireless network data packet processing (claimed as standard-essential). Both the infringement claim and the revocation counterclaim were dismissed. The court found non-infringement after interpreting the patent claims with reference to the description and drawings (Art. 69 EPC), concluding that the defendant's Cisco products did not implement the claimed DMA-based simultaneous header writing mechanism. The revocation counterclaim also failed. Costs were split: claimant to bear 40%, defendants 60%. |
| 2025-02-19 | UPC_CoA_844/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Order from the Court of Appeal dated 19 February 2025 permitting Aarke AB to withdraw its appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division's judgment (which had found infringement of EP 1 793 917 by Aarke and issued an injunction). The CoA found no legitimate interest of SodaStream in the appeal being decided, and permitted the withdrawal under R. 265.1 RoP. The appeal was declared closed and a cost decision was issued as required by R. 265.2(c) RoP. |
| 2025-02-19 | UPC_CFI_322/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Munich Local Division declared both the infringement action (by Dyson Technology Limited against SharkNinja Europe Limited and SharkNinja Germany GmbH concerning EP 2 043 492) and the defendants' counterclaim for revocation closed, following an out-of-court settlement. Dyson withdrew the infringement claim and SharkNinja withdrew the revocation counterclaim, both waiving their respective claims. Each party was ordered to receive 60% reimbursement of the relevant court fees. |
| 2025-02-19 | UPC_CoA_218/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal ordered the release of security deposits (totalling EUR 500,000) that NTS had provided for costs in three related cases, following withdrawal of the underlying infringement actions by NTS at the Munich Local Division. |
| 2025-02-17 | UPC_CFI_440/2023 | Paris LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Paris Local Division issued an interim management order following the preparatory conference (R. 105.5 RoP) in the infringement action by Seoul Viosys against Laser Components SAS and Photon Wave Co. concerning EP 3 404 726 (UV LEDs). The order summarised the key contested legal and factual issues (claim interpretation, PKB chip characteristics), fixed the case value at EUR 500,000 (rejecting the defendant's argument for EUR 250,000), and scheduled the oral hearing for 13 March 2025. |
| 2025-02-14 | UPC_APP_51844/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Munich Local Division rejected the preliminary objection of eight Myriad Genetics defendants challenging UPC jurisdiction and the claimant's standing to sue, holding that questions of standing and entitlement to asserted claims relate only to the merits and not to jurisdiction under Art. 32 UPCA. |
| 2025-02-14 | APL_39664/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI granted | Court of Appeal Panel 2 set aside the The Hague Local Division's refusal to grant provisional measures, and granted a preliminary injunction in favour of Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. against Sibio Technology Limited and Umedwings Netherlands B.V. concerning EP 3 831 283 (continuous glucose monitoring device). The Court found the patent valid (overcoming added matter and other validity challenges) and likely infringed by Sibionics' GS1 Device. A general injunction was ordered against all infringing acts in UPC Contracting Member States. Sibionics was also ordered to provide origin/distribution chain information and to deliver up infringing products. Penalty payments of EUR 10,000 per infringing product or EUR 100,000 per day were imposed. |
| 2025-02-12 | UPC_APP_67626/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division judge-rapporteur rejected the defendants' preliminary objection (admissibility challenge under Art. 33(2) UPCA) to the infringement action filed by biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KG, confirming the Munich Local Division's jurisdiction over the claim and ordering that the statement of claim was validly served on 2 December 2024. |
| 2025-02-12 | APL_58177/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal Panel 1a order on the scope of confidentiality protection (R. 262A RoP) in proceedings by Daedalus Prime LLC (appellant/claimant) against Xiaomi entities, with MediaTek as intervener, concerning EP 2 792 100. The order addresses whether US attorneys (non-EU, non-UPCA Art. 48 representatives) may be granted full access to confidential information. The Court held that R. 262A.6 RoP does not require persons accessing confidential information to be employees or Art. 48 UPCA representatives; access depends on necessity and trustworthiness assessed case by case. |
| 2025-02-12 | ACT_53813/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural scheduling order in Syngenta Limited v Sumi Agro Europe Limited and Sumi Agro Limited (UPC_CFI_566/2024, EP 2 152 073), setting the interim conference for 6 October 2025 and the oral hearing for 10 December 2025. The Court also requested the assignment of a technically qualified judge and invited Syngenta to submit observations on case management. |
| 2025-02-11 | UPC_CoA_563/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Dismissed | Court of Appeal rejected Suinno's appeal against a first-instance procedural order in the infringement action Suinno brought against Microsoft before the Paris Central Division. The appeal was rejected. |
| 2025-02-10 | UPC_APP_45481/2024 | Munich LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | Order of the Munich Local Division (judge-rapporteur) rejecting a preliminary objection filed by defendants ILME S.p.A. and ILME GmbH against Claimant PHOENIX CONTACT GmbH's infringement action. The court dismissed the preliminary objection and all auxiliary requests, and continued the main proceedings. Leave to appeal was granted under Rule 220.2 RoP, as the court found the legal question concerning UPC jurisdictional rules (specifically interpretation of the UPCA as an international treaty measured against the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties) may be significant for many cases and warrants uniform application. No preliminary reference to the CJEU under Art. 21 UPCA was warranted. |
| 2025-02-06 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | Procedural | Infringed | Procedural 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. |
| 2025-02-06 | UPC_CFI_210/2023 | Mannheim LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Infringed | The 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. |
| 2025-02-05 | ACT_597277/2023 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a scheduling order summoning the parties to the oral hearing on 11 February 2025 in the infringement action (with counterclaim for revocation) brought by Edwards Lifesciences against Meril entities concerning EP 3 669 828. |
| 2025-02-04 | UPC_CFI_218/2023 | Mannheim LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Mannheim Local Division issued a procedural order confirming that Panasonic Holdings Corporation (claimant) and the Xiaomi entities and related defendants had reached a settlement, resulting in the mutual withdrawal of both the infringement action and the defendants' joint counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 3 069 315. Costs were settled by agreement between the parties; no court cost decision was required. |
| 2025-01-31 | ACT_576606/2023 | Mannheim LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Revoked | The Mannheim Local Division revoked EP 2 548 648 (a wood/biomass shredder patent) in its entirety for lack of inventive step across 13 UPC member states, and dismissed the infringement action as a consequence; the claimant Rematec was ordered to bear 75% of costs. |
| 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. |
| 2025-01-29 | UPC_CFI_468/2023 | Paris LD | Application Rop 365 | — | Settled | The Paris Local Division confirmed the settlement between C-KORE and NOVAWELL pursuant to Rule 365 RoP. The infringement proceedings and the counterclaim for revocation were dismissed. The details of the settlement remain confidential. No order as to costs. |
| 2025-01-28 | UPC_CFI_421/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | Decision from Munich Local Division dated 28 January 2025 permitting withdrawal of the patent infringement action filed by Qualcomm against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and related entities. The withdrawal followed a settlement between Qualcomm and Defendant 1 (Transsion). The court allowed 60% reimbursement of court fees pursuant to R. 370.9(b)(i) RoP, as the withdrawal occurred before closure of the written procedure. Defendants 1–4 consented to withdrawal; Defendant 6 did not comment. No cost order was required. |
| 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. |
| 2025-01-27 | UPC_CFI_302/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | — | Procedural only | Procedural 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. |
| 2025-01-27 | UPC_CFI_244/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division ordered a small company (claimant in infringement proceedings, Snowpixie Co., Ltd.) to provide security for costs under Rule 158 RoP based on its operating losses and insufficient assets. The court reduced the security amount to reflect equity principles ensuring effective access to justice. The court also denied legal aid (Prozesskostenhilfe) to the claimant, finding it had sufficient resources given it was supported by a litigation funder. |
| 2025-01-27 | UPC_CFI_244/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Procedural order requiring SnowPixie Co., Ltd. (defendant/applicant) to provide security for costs pursuant to Rule 158 RoP, in an amount below the EUR 260,000 demanded by the opposing party (claimant), taking into account SnowPixie's status as a small enterprise and equity considerations. The application for legal aid (Prozesskostenhilfe) was rejected. |
| 2025-01-27 | UPC_CFI_52/2023 | Munich LD | Application RoP262.1 (b) | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural 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. |
| 2025-01-24 | ACT_13227/2024 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order from the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_114/2024 and UPC_CFI_448/2024) rescheduling the interim conference between Heraeus Electronics and Vibrantz concerning EP 3 215 288 from 23 May 2025 to 28 May 2025 due to a scheduling conflict, while confirming the oral hearing date of 1 July 2025. |
| 2025-01-24 | CC_49716/2024 | Munich LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order in the infringement actions by Sanofi (and successor entities) against multiple generic pharmaceutical companies (Accord, STADA, Dr Reddy's, Zentiva) concerning EP 2 493 466 (UPC_CFI_145/2024 and related cases). The order concerns case management — identifying parties and representatives across the eight consolidated cases relating to counterclaims for revocation. |
| 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. |
| 2025-01-22 | UPC_CFI_310/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Partially revoked | The Paris Central Division partially revoked EP 3 613 453 B1, finding that claim 1 lacked inventive step; the patent was maintained in amended form based on the independent validity of claims 6, 7 and 8 in combination with claim 1 as granted. Each party bore its own costs. |
| 2025-01-20 | UPC_CoA_835/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order of the Court of Appeal dated 20 January 2025 on Amazon's R. 262A RoP application for confidentiality protection regarding Nokia's licensing and licence-agreement information disclosed in infringement proceedings (Nokia v. Amazon, UPC_CFI_399/2023). The CoA granted Amazon's request for confidentiality, ordering that certain grey-highlighted passages and 'strictly confidential' annexes regarding Nokia's licensee identities and licence agreement terms be restricted in access to designated persons only, beyond the CFI's existing classification. |
| 2025-01-20 | UPC_CFI_430/2023 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | The Nordic-Baltic Regional Division declared proceedings closed following the mutual withdrawal of Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.'s infringement action and Dexcom's counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 3 977 921. Both parties consented to each other's withdrawal and agreed that no cost decision would be issued. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_487/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Settled | The Munich Local Division confirmed the withdrawal of NEC Corporation's patent infringement action against TCL entities concerning EP 2 645 714. The parties had reached a contractual agreement before closure of the written procedure. The court granted the withdrawal and ordered 60% reimbursement of court fees to the claimant. Each party bears its own costs; no cost decision was issued. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_376/2023 | Brussels LD | Infringement Action | — | Not infringed | Decision on the merits by the Brussels Local Division (full panel) in an infringement action concerning a patent on a medical device (sleep apnea treatment). The court dismissed both the literal infringement claim and the infringement-by-equivalence claim against OrthoApnea S.L. and Vivisol B BV. On literal infringement, the court interpreted the patent claims in light of the claim as a whole and found the accused products did not meet all claim features. On equivalence, the court found no functional equivalence regardless of which equivalence test was applied. The court also lifted the earlier evidence-preservation order (seizure) and ordered the claimant (unnamed, anonymized) to pay the defendants' costs. A key procedural holding addressed the temporal conditions for bringing main proceedings following evidence preservation. |
| 2025-01-17 | UPC_CFI_316/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | — | Revoked | The Paris Central Division (Seat, Panel 1) revoked European patent EP 3 430 921 B1 in its entirety, with effect for Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden. The claimant NJOY Netherlands B.V. succeeded in demonstrating that granted claim 1 lacked clarity/added matter, and the defendant Juul Labs International Inc.'s twelve auxiliary requests were all found unallowable. A thirteenth conditional auxiliary request (2d) was rejected as unreasonably numerous and unclear. Juul Labs was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings. |