LD Duesseldorf, June 27, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_457/2023

If the Defendant deals extensively with license negotiations between itself and a patent pool in the context of the substantiation of the FRAND objection raised by it, the Claimant can only respond comprehensively to this argument if he can consult with employees of the patent pool.
If the Claimant is initially prevented from such consultation by an application for the protection of trade secrets (R. 262A RoP), his right to be heard can be taken into account by setting a time limit for his reply. The Claimant’s right to be heard can be satisfied by extending the time limit for responding to this submission upon request.
Even if an application for protection of trade secrets only relates to a definable part of a pleading, such as the statements on the FRAND objection, a partial extension of the time limit, limited to the part concerned, can be waived in the interests of effective conduct of the proceedings and to prevent a permanent divergence of the deadlines.
The time extension for the entire brief may only be granted if the conduct of the oral hearing is not jeopardized.