Author: Michael Horndasch

  • LD Düsseldorf, March 04, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_115/2024, UPC_CFI_377/2024

    Denial of additional written submissions (R. 36 RoP): The judge-rapporteur can permit additional submissions only if a justified request is made before the conclusion of the written procedure. The court denied both parties’ requests for additional written submissions due to non-compliance with procedural rules. Timing and justification of requests (R. 36 RoP) : The claimant’s…

  • LD Hamburg, 25 January 2024, decision, UPC_CFI_559935/2023

    Background: The plaintiff filed a claim for damages subsequent to a German patent infringement case in which the defendant had been found to infringe the German part of EP 1 740 740 B1. The defendant objected to the jurisdiction of the court regarding the damages claim. This objection was allowed by the judge-rapporteur, as per…

  • LD Paris, 30 January 2024, procedural order (review R.333), UPC_CFI_230/2023

    Amount of fine in the event of a breach of a confidentiality order: The decision relates to a review according to Rule 333 RoP of point 6.) of a confidentiallity order issued by the judge rapporteur on 19 December 2023. It emphasized that while the Paris and Munich orders pertain to the same protected confidential…

  • LD Munich, 5 February 2024, decision UPC_CFI_498/2023

    Electronic service of the statement of claim: Rule 275 RoP does not permit the court to designate someone as person authorised to accept service, if that person has not notified the Registry or the claimant to be willing to accept service of the statement of claim on behalf of the defendant at an electronic address…

  • LD Paris, 24 January 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_230/2023

    Review Procedure comes before Appeal Process: Case management decisions must first be reviewed by the panel under Rule 333 RoP before they can be appealed under Rule 220 RoP (cf. UPC Court of Appeal (n°486/2023, §6). Consequently, if the review under Rule 333 RoP of a confidentiality order is still pending, a request for leave…

  • CD Paris, 22 January 2024, order, UPC_CFI_308/2023

    Background of the case: The applicant filed a revocation action against the patent at issue. On 27 November 2023, the respondent submitted a defence to revocation which was considered by as incomplete the Registry. Consequently, on 11 December 2023, the respondent requested to correct the detected deficiencies, by logding a corrected statement of defence which…

  • CD Munich, 31 January 2024, order, UPC_CFI_252/2023

    Further written submission following the interim conference to deal with a later filed document: Following the exchange of the written pleadings in accordance with Rule 43 RoP, the judge-rapporteur – after having informed the parties of his intention to do so – closed the written procedure pursuant to Rule 58 in connection with Rule 35…

  • LD Duesseldorf, 29 January 2024, UPC_CFI_463/2023

    Assessment of validity of the patent in proceedings for provisional measures : In proceedings for provisional measures, the panel must assess, based on the submissions of the parties, whether the validity challenges raise reasonable doubts about the validity of the asserted patent, Article 62(4) of the UPCA in conjunction with Rule 211.2 of the Rules…