Change in parties: correction of the party designation from a non-existent person or a person who does not have the capacity to be a party by analogous application of R. 305 RoP. A distinction must be made between the incorrect designation of a defendant and the designation of a non-existent person or a person who does...

Request for panel review of dismissal of security for costs by judge-rapporteur dismissed (R. 333.1 RoP, R. 158 RoP)

The judge-rapporteur correctly held that, under these principles, neither a financial risk nor a likelihood of unenforceability is presented to the Court. 

The Claimant, as part of the PepsiCo group, is...

Postponement  of oral hearing (R. 9 RoP, R. 108 RoP). Upon request of the parties and after consultation of the panel the date of the oral hearing is postponed from 11 September 2024 to 23 October 2024 because of postponement of the decision date in parallel proceedings from  6 September 2024 to 13 September 2024.

UNION-IP Round Table Friday 8 November 2024: Protecting Functional Designs and Works of Art
Functionality has been a debate for long time in the field of design and copyright protection. A balance needs to be made so as not to circumvent patents for protecting products with technical functions, whilst not being too...

IPPT20240909, UPC CFI, LD Mannheim, Panasonic v Xiaomi
Panel confirms case management orders judge-rapporteur (R. 333 RoP, R. 262A RoP, R. 29(d) RoP). Panel exercises its authority to order and extension of the time limit for lodging Reply to the Defence to the Counterclaim together with any Rejoinder to the Reply to...

Request to stay infringement proceedings dismissed (R. 295 RoP). There is currently no reason to suspend the infringement proceedings, even though the interim hearing on the revocation action will take place on 11 September 2024 and the oral hearing on 6 November 2024. The outcome of the proceeding is uncertain in...

Ex parte preliminary injunction and seizure of infringing oral cleansing system in connection with IFA 2024 trade fair in Berlin following earlier cease-and-desist-declaration (Article 62 UPCA, R. 209 RoP)

Request for discretionary review rejected (Rule 220.3 RoP). Motorola failed to demonstrate that a review of the impugned order is necessary to ensure a consistent application and interpretation of the RoP (point 8 of the Preambule of the RoP) or any other objective of the discretionary review procedure. Its contention...

Request for expedition of appeals rejected (Rule 9.3(b) RoP). Possibility that the Munich Local Division might grant an injunction on the basis of a patent that has been upheld by the Court of First Instance but may subsequently be revoked by the Court of Appeal, is not sufficient to justify expediting the appeals. The...

Application for preliminary measures unfounded: Defendant’s conduct does not already constitute an imminent infringement, i.e. offering of infringing product (Article 62(1) UPCA) (Article 25(a) UPCA). In order for a patent infringement to be considered imminent, there must be concrete indications in the overall...

Connection joinder only possible within the competence limits of the competence regime of the UPCA (Article 33 UPCA, Rule 340 RoP). Referral of an action for infringement from a local division to the central division only possible with the the agreement of the parties involved.

President rightly rejected request for a language change. The fact that the claimant and two of the three defendants are domiciled in countries where German is an official languageis an important factor in the decision on an application to use the language of the patent as the language of the proceedings (Art. 49(5)...

Zaak C-339/22. BSH Hausgeräte In his opinion the A-G finds that that provision does not apply to the validity of a patent registered in a third State. However, courts of Member States having jurisdiction under another rule of that regulation may refrain from ruling on that question.

UPC jurisdiction because of place of harmful event (Article 7(2) and 71(b(1) Brussels I recast). UPC has international jurisdiction in respect of an infringement action where the European patent relied on by the claimant has effect in at least one Contracting Member State and the alleged damage may occur in that...

Expansion of confidentiality restrictions for two additional third party licence agreement dismissed (Rule 9.2 RoP, Rule 262A RoP). A party must regularly seek an order for access restrictions for third-party licence agreements at such an early stage that it can unconditionally present its submission within the...

Application for review of the allocation of technically qualified judge dismissed (Rule 9.1 RoP, Rules 33-34 RoP). The technically qualified judge is one of the judges of the panel as defined in Articles 19 and 20 UPCA (concerning the Court of First Instance) and the legal texts governing the UPC do not provide the...

Application to add OTECH Germany as third defendant rejected as late filed (Rule 305 RoP). Plaintiff was aware in June 2023 that OTECH Germany GmbH had been found guilty of patent infringement by the Mannheim District Court. […] it could and should have used its knowledge of this judgement as an opportunity to conduct...

Case management order (Rule 101 RoP) following interim conference (Rule 105 RoP) in FRAND case regarding taking of evidence, submission of further documents, panel decision on appeal during oral hearing, objections to delay, non-technical defence, provision for security, preparation for oral hearing.

Action closed after rectification by the EPO of contested decision in accordance with request (Rule 88 and 91 RoP). The submission of the Claimant doesn’t mention any particular circumstances justifying a decision of reimbursement.

Protected confidential information – trade secrets (Article 9 Trade secret directive, Article 58 UPCA, Rule 262A RoP). Information on profit margin can be classified as confidential if it is not available from publicly accessible sources.Information about the few employees having access to this financial information...