Home » UPC decisions » Central Division » Munich Central Division » CD Munich, February 28, 2025, Order, UPC_829/2024

CD Munich, February 28, 2025, Order, UPC_829/2024

Michael Horndasch

2 min Reading time

Table of Contents

  1. Key takeaways
  2. Division
  3. UPC number
  4. Type of proceedings
  5. Parties
  6. Patent(s)
  7. Jurisdictions
  8. Body of legislation / Rules

Download decision(s) (PDF)

Key takeaways

Revocation action initiation (R. 42 RoP)

✓

The revocation action was initiated by the defendant against the original claimant (Virdia Inc.).

Application for substitution of parties (R. 305 RoP)

✓

The original claimant (Virdia inc.) applied to substitute the party with the new patent proprietor International N&H Denmark ApS.

This is supported by a 2024 patent assignment transferring ownership of the patent in suit.

Admissibility & grounds of substitution (R. 42, 305.1(c), 8.5, 8.6 RoP)

✓

The application for substitution was found admissible and well-founded.

It ensures the revocation action is against the correct party, the actual proprietor.

Division

Central Division Munich

UPC number

UPC_829/2024

Type of proceedings

Revication Action

Parties

UPM-Kymmene Oyj

vs.

Virdia Inc. (original)
International N&H Denmark ApS (substituted)

Patent(s)

EP 2 611 800

Jurisdictions

Unified Patent Court

Body of legislation / Rules

R. 8.5 RoP, R. 8.6 RoP, R. 42 RoP, R. 305 RoP, R. 306 RoP

2025-02-28-CD_Munich-UPC_8292024Download

Was the article helpful?

Categories

Tags

More exciting articles on similar topics

Content not to be missed

  • Helsinki Local Division

    LD Helsinki, February 11, 2025, procedural order regarding changes in a case, UPC_CFI_214/2013

    The main issues to be considered when addressing the admissibility of changes in a case are that the nature of the frontloaded procedure of the UPC must be protected and that during the process there are no such changes that the defendant’s right to defence is compromised.: If these two premises are protected there is …
    →
  • Munich Central Division

    CD Munich, December 17, 2024, Order, UPC 252/2023

    Release of Security for Costs Requires Independent Financial Standing: The UPC held that R. 352.2 RoP also applies to the release of a security for legal costs, even though this is not explicitly mentioned in Rule 158 RoP, which governs the imposition of such securities. The Court ultimately rejected Claimant’s request to release the security …
    →
  • Munich Central Division

    CD Munich, November 4, 2024, Order, UPC 75/2023

    Access to unredacted documents granted despite confidentiality request of the Claimant on the basis of R. 262.2 RoP: The Court granted the Applicant access to unredacted documents even though the Claimant argued that the information contained therein was confidential and that disclosure could cause commercial harm. The Court based its decision on Rule 262.6 RoP, …
    →

Stay in the loop

Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.

* = Required field