Defendant 1 to pay the fee for Counterclaim for revocation on submission of a separate counterclaim. (Rule 370.7 RoP , Rule 25 RoP). If a counterclaim for revocation is submitted on behalf of several defendants, only one court fee needs to be paid. If one of the defendants submits their own counterclaim at a later...

Suspension of inspection of files by a third party granted in light of applicant’s request for a panel review. (Rule 262.1(b) RoP, Rule 335 RoP , Rule 333 RoP). A judge-rapporteur whose procedural order or decision is subject to review by the panel may be entitled to and, if applicable, also obliged to suspend their...

One week extension for the submission of the Rejoinder / Reply / Defence , for the application for amendment of the patent. (Rule 9.3 RoP, Rule 29 RoP, Rule 30 RoP). Extension will not affect the dates already set for the interim conference and oral hearing.

IPPT20260225, UPC CFI, LD Düsseldorf, beMatrix v Yaham Technology

Ex-parte preliminary injunction for seizure of infringing goods at a trade show granted against the defendant . (Article 62(1) UPCA, Article 25(a) UPCA, Rule 211.1 (b), Rule 209.2 RoP, Rule 212 RoP) . Attacked embodiment infringes claim 1 of the patent.....

Confidentiality order amended to include omitted paragraphs. (Rule 262 RoP). No reason to exclude claimant's patent attorneys from confidentiality club. (Article 48 UPCA, Article 58 UPCA, Rule. 262A RoP). It follows from Art. 48 UPCA that a party has the fundamental right to freely choose whether it wishes to be...

Amendment of claim allowed (Rule 263.2 RoP)Claimant allowed to include allegedly infringing product “mNEXSPIKE”.

Patent valid and not infringed. (Article 65 UPCA, Article 25 UPCA) Claim interpretation on the basis of the language of the patent (German) (Article 69 EPC, Article 70 (1) EPC). Although the language of the proceedings is English, interpretation and considerations are based on the German text of the patent and the...

Request for security for costs dismissed (Article 69(4) UPCA, Rule 158 RoP). Simple reference to Claimant’s registered office in Canada does not demonstrate that a cost order would be unduly burdensome. Claimant’s annual revenue estimated to be less than EUR 20 million in 2025 , is not so low that one could assume...

Public access to registry granted to law firm (Art. 45 UPCA, Rule 262.1(b)) .After anonymisation of personal data. Limited to documents regarding unreasonable delay. (Rule 211.4 RoP)

Confidentiality club regarding sensitive commercial information and technical know-how of the defendant. (Article 58 UPCA, Rule 262A (2) RoP)

Withdrawal by party consent. (Rule 265 RoP). Partial withdrawal of infringement action allowed. Rule 265.1 RoP also applies if the action is not withdrawn in its entirety, but only in relation to some of several defendants.

Language of proceedings changed from German to English for reasons of fairness. (Article 49 (5) UPCA , Rule 323 RoP). The need for strategic coordination and technical support in a common working language is a decisive factor in the balancing of all interests. Taking into account that the language primarily chosen is n...

Claims for damages for loss of profits dismissed because it cannot be concluded that the claimant is entitled to the amount claimed or that an order for payment of damages can be made (Article 68 UPCA, Article  13 Enforcement Directive). National law applies to a claim for damages for loss of profit where the facts of...

Application for discretionary review granted (R. 220.3 RoP; R. 333 RoP, R. 262 RoP) because the question of whether the rapporteur’s decision regarding access under R. 262 RoP is subject to review by the panel pursuant to R 333 RoP, and whether and how an appeal may be lodged against that decision, raises fundamental...

Request for discretionary review by Court of Appeal dismissed of retroactive extension of time period for lodging Reply (R. 220.3 RoP, R. 29(a) RoP, R. 9.3(a) RoP). Impugned order not manifestly incorrect. The LD dismissed the application for re-establishment of rights pursuant to R. 320 RoP and used its discretion to...

Infringement orders for UK and Germany set aside. No infringement in Germany because private prior use right of Kodak Graphic (Article 28 UPCA). Alleged infringement by Kodak Graphic in UK unsubstantiated (Article 25 UPCA). Fujifilm accepts that under UK law the importer is the party who has legal and beneficial interest...

No default judgment justified as a sanction for lack of diligence in providing a bank guarantee of € 200.000 within the ordered time limit of 16 January 2026 (R. 158.5 RoP, R. 355 RoP). It should be noted that R. 158.5 RoP provides that the reporting judge ‘may’ issue a default judgment, which leaves the judge with...

Request for discretionary review dismissed (R. 220.3 RoP). The fundamental legal question underlying the request has been clarified by the Court of Appeal in its order of 13 March 2026 [between the same parties] . The Court of Appeal ruled that, where the UPC has jurisdiction on the basis of Article 7(2) of Regulation...

Appeal from security for costs order (R.  158 RoP) inadmissible in the absence of a leave to appeal (R. 220.2 RoP). Appeals against security for costs orders require prior authorisation from the CFI unless brought with the final decision. A general reference to appeal provisions does not constitute permission to appeal...

Appeal stayed at joint request of the parties (R. 295(d) RoP) to facilitate a pending settlement and avoid unnecessary deadlines