On 4 November 2025, the Administrative Committee decided to amend the Table of Court fees and relevant provisions of the Rule of Procedure of the UPC and the Guidelines on the determination of Court fees.

Preliminary injunction for direct infringement (Article 25 UPCA, Article 62 UPCA, R. 211 RoP), order to communicate information (Article 67 UPCA), recall (Article 64(2)(b) UPCA )and cost award (Article 69 UPCA). Patent more likely than not valid. No added matter (Article 123(2) EPC): The Court concurs with the...

Temporary Agent. As of September 1st 2026. Alicante, Spain. A Member of a Board of Appeal of the EUIPO will be expected to review cases and prepare decisions on appeals against decisions of the first instance of the Office (trade mark or design examination, opposition, cancellation and design invalidity) and, in the...

After covering the case law of the Unified Patent Court since the Court opened its doors at 1 June 2023, we can proudly proclaim that we have passed the milestone of 1.000 UPC-decisions published and reported at IP-PorTal. All in the special IPPT-format with hyperlinks to earlier cases and the relevant Articles of the...

The notion of due cause can balance trademark protection and freedom of expression. However, the proprietor of a trademark with a reputation need not tolerate a third party’s use of an identical or similar sign when such use mainly seeks to exploit the mark’s reputation to promote a political programme. If the...

Request for predetermined time limits for not yet represented defendants accepted (R. 9.3 RoP, R. 23 RoP).The defendants 1-3 and 6-7 not yet represented by counsel would agree to also instruct counsel to represent them in the present proceedings and to accept the requested time limit regime regardless of the date of...

 Even an imminent infringement in Germany is sufficient to establish the local jurisdiction of the German Local Divisions (Article 32(1)(c) UPCA, Article 33(1)(a) UPCA). In view of the circumstances of the case […] it is possible that the contested embodiments will be exhibited at IFA 2025 and that they will make use...

IPPT20250904, UPC LD Mannheim, Huawei v MediaTek
Security for costs regarding Claimant residing in China (Art. 69 (4) UPCA, R. 158.1 RoP). The Local Division Mannheim has so far not been able to successfully serve a judicial document in the People's Republic of China (where Claimant resides) in any of the many...

Preliminary injunction and other provisional measures for direct patent infringement (Article 25 UPCA, R. 209 RoP). If a defendant, upon invitation, fails to lodge an objection to an application for provisional measures the case can be decided by means of a regular order (R. 206 RoP, R. 209.1(a) RoP, R. 355.1(a) RoP)...

Request denied for discretionary appeal review of order dismissing leave to amend counterclaim for revocation by introducing new prior art (R. 263.2 RoP, R. 220.3 RoP). Under these circumstances, and without further convincing explanations from CERACON as to the reasons why EP’480, with reasonable diligence,

No discretionary appeal review of panel confirmation of rejection of request for further written pleadings (regarding new allegedly infringing products) (R. 220.3 RoP, R. 36 RoP). CFI's exercise of discretion cannot be regarded as manifestly wrong. The CFI has not deprived CENTRIPETAL from its right to bring separate...

Preliminary objection rejected in revocation action, claiming lack of jurisdiction because claimant in this revocation action is a straw company and effectively the same party as in previous proceedings regarding the same patent before the LD Düsseldorf (R. 19 RoP, R. 20 RoP, Article 33(4) UPCA). European Union law...

Ex parte anti-anti-suit injunction (R. 211 RoP). The undisturbed conduct of proceedings before the UPC should be secured as a whole. No objections to the version of the application insofar as it extends to equivalent judicial or official measures, since in this respect it is not the formal designation of the judicial...

Cilag waited almost three months, until 6 February 2025, before sending a letter to Rivolution. Cilag also did not take action immediately [...] in a letter to Rivolution of 26 March 2026 (in reply to Rivolution’s response of 20 February 2025). It then took until the end of April, 29 April 2025. The tender that...

Application for leave to amend the claim denied (R. 263 RoP). The fact that the Claimant seeks to claim infringement by equivalence does not constitute an amendment of the case. Extending the equivalence argument to features 1.9 and 1.10 does not alter the nature or scope of the dispute. The equivalence argument...

Plaintiff ordered to provide € 150.000 security for the costs of the legal dispute and other costs (R. 158.1 RoP). Sufficient likelihood that any decision by the UPC on costs in favour of the second defendant could only be enforced with disproportionate difficulty against company based in the People's Republic of China...

Patent maintained in amended form (Article 65 UPCA). Indirect infringement (Article 26 UPCA); No exhaustion (Article 29 UPCA). As is usually the case, the purpose specified in the claim (Article 69 EPC) defines the protected subject matter in such a way that it must be objectively suitable for interacting with the...

Application for suspensive effect appeal of confidentiality club regime rejected (R. 262A RoP, R. 223 RoP). The appeal will not become devoid of purpose as a result of not granting the application for suspensive effect. The information protected under R. 262A RoP will still be confidential as the employees from...

Preliminary objection rejected (R. 19 RoP). Lodged within one month of service, because, in the present case, the Statement of claim is deemed to have been served on the Defendants on the tenth day following posting, i.e. between 25 and 30 March 2024, in accordance with Rule 271.6 (b) RoP. Unfounded: the objections to...

A lawyer authorised to represent a party in a proceeding on provisional measures is not automatically authorised to represent the same party in a subsequent infringement action concerning the same patent (Article 48(1) UPCA, R. 8.1 RoP,