Direct infringement (Article 25 UPCA), revocation action dismissed by default (Article 65 UPCA, R. 355 RoP). Decision by default cannot be issued against the defendant based solely on a procedural violation or failure to defend (R. 355 RoP). Before issuing a decision by default against a defendant based on a procedural...

Confidentiality club as to information regarding attorney’s fees and expenses incurred. (Article 58 UPCA, R. 262A RoP). Protection cannot be recognized from the point of view of protecting the law firm about the disclosure of the costs it applies to patent litigation, but only from the point of view of the company...

Security for costs can only be requested by defendants  (Article 69(4) UPCA, R. 158 RoP). Article 69(4) UPCA contains deliberate language to restrict the possibility to request a security order to a defendant. R. 158 RoP cannot be interpreted as merely extending the Court’s powers beyond those explicitly provided in Ar...

Defendants to provide security for the Claimant’s legal costs in the (total) amount of € 75.000 regarding the counterclaim for revocation (Article  69(4) UPCA, R. 158 RoP). Article 69(4) UPCA does not provide for an obligation on the part of the Defendant to provide security.  A Claimant can request a Defendant to...

A decision on cost for provisional measures proceedings must be applied for within one month of service of the decision on the merits (R. 151.1 RoP). If no proceedings on the merits are pending the on month time limit begins with the service of the first instance order for provisional measures. The time limit of R. 151...

Penalty payments because of alleged failure to comply with the terms of a first instance court order, are to be decided by a panel of the Court (instead of a single judge) upon request of the other party or of its own motion (R. 354.4 RoP. The procedure foreseen in R. 264 RoP shall apply (opportunity to be heard). At...

The UPC has competence regarding acts committed before entry into force of the UPCA and during (a withdrawn) opt-out of a patent (Article 32 UPCA, Article 83 UPCA). The wording of Art. 32(1) UPCA does not provide for any temporal limitation of the exclusive co.mpetence of the Court. The option to opt-out is limited to...

Ex parte order to preserve evidence (R. 192 RoP) and order for inspection (R. 199 RoP) (Article 60 UPCA), appointment of independent experts, subject to confidentiality circle, time limits procedure on the merits, € 25.000 security and limited use of the outcome of the measures. Jurisdiction and territorial competence...

IPPT20250529, UPC CFI, CD Paris, Lindal v Rocep-Lusol
Revocation action dismissed; patent maintained as amended by the First Auxiliary request (Article 65 UPCA). Industrial applicability (Article 57 EPC) and insufficient disclosure (Article 83 EPC)(Article 138(1(a)(b) EPC). If an (alleged) invention would not comply...

Review of ex parte order to preserve evidence and inspection unsuccessful (R. 197.3 RoP). Sufficient likelihood of infringement: The court currently has no evidence that a Laval nozzle does not allow grain sizes above 50 um. Nor does the respondent explicitly claim this. This circumstance, together with other...

German part of European patent revoked (Article 65 UPCA). The Unified Patent Court can revoke European patents for one or more individual UPC Member States if so requested (Article 34 UPCA, Article 76 UPCA). No stay until Opposition Division has decided (Article 33(10) UPCA, R. 295 RoP). Claimant's interest in...

IPPT20250523, UPC LD Paris, Hurom v NUC
Dutch, French, German and Italian parts of European patent revoked as amended (Article 138(1) EPC, Article 65(2) UPCA); infringement claims concerning Poland admissible but dismissed as unfounded. Claim interpretation principles (Article 69 EPC) apply equally to the assessment of...

Procedural order on preliminary objections (R. 19 RoP, R. 20 RoP). The PO’s filed on 24 April 2025 (…) on behalf of Moderna Belgium, Moderna Germany and Poland, are not admissible for these defendants (for Moderna Poland this only applies to action 192/25), as they are late filed and these defendants are therefore...

Panel review confirms case management order not to allow a further exchange of written pleadings (R. 12.5 RoP, R. 36 RoP, R. 333 RoP). A request pursuant to R. 36, 12.5 RoP calls for a sufficient degree of substantiation so that the judge-rapporteur can retrieve the essential facts from the application itself without...

No security for costs (R. 158 RoP, Article 69 UPCA). Also the claimant is permitted to submit a request for security for costs, as this rule does not restrict such actions to a defendant only. It is sufficient for a defendant to establish that enforcement of a cost order is unduly burdensome. The burden of showing this...

Patent revoked (Article 65 UPCA): lack of novelty (claim 8) and lack of inventive step: the skilled person, looking to improve D3 to provide a more reliable ball contact detection, would have looked in the literature of games and sports how to increase the reliability of the detection, including D2, which belongs to...

No need to adjudicate because of settlement (R. 360 RoP), costs to be borne by respondent (R. 118.5 RoP). Giving cause for the action to be brought and requirement of a warning letter? If the obligation to bear the costs in a decision pursuant to Rule 360 RoP depends on whether the defendant gave cause for the action...

No bifurcation despite pending revocation action before the Paris Central Division (Article 33(3) UPCA, R. 37 RoP). As both parties voted against bifurcation, the panel has decided to proceed with both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation. Furthermore, Belparts informed the court that the counter...

The final decision on whether to grant leave to amend the case to the effect that the infringement action also covers the AM67x product as an attacked embodiment postponed until the oral hearing because it may depend on claim interpretation (R. 263 RoP). Whether the new explicitly attacked embodiments have the same...

Confidentiality and confidentiality club (Article 58 UPCA, R. 262 RoP, R. 262A RoP, Article 9 Trade Secrets Directive). Whether Rule 262A VerfO also covers the situation where (without a restriction on access being imposed on one party) the parties to the proceedings are required to treat confidential information as...