CD Milan, July 29, 2026, procedural order, UPC_CFI_1902/2025

The Claimant lodged an infringement action against two Defendants, Ziwu registered in China and Resosport registered in Hong Kong. Service was duly effected on Ziwu but not on Resosport. Ziwu thus requested an alignment of deadlines against acceptance of service by Resosport. Claimant opposed to the request. The judge rapporteur set a joint date from which the period for filing the statement of defense should run. Claimant appealed this decision emphasizing that the UPC-system was designed for fast patent dispute resolution and that both defendants had the same representative in parallel PI proceedings.

The Panel held that Resosport’s UPC representative could not be compelled to accept service in the main proceedings, even though they acted for Resosport in parallel PI proceedings. Since service on Resosport had to proceed through ordinary Hague Convention channels and remained uncertain at the time of the case management order of the Judge Rapporteur, the alignment of deadlines in exchange for immediate acceptance of service by Resosport served case-management efficiency. Thus, the Panel confirmed the initial order as a balanced solution: it extended Ziwu’s deadline of around 50 days but significantly shortened Resosport’s potential deadline also of approximately 50 days, ensuring orderly and efficient proceedings. Claimant’s request for review and shortening of the deadlines was therefore dismissed.