Home » UPC decisions » Local Division » Munich Local Division » LD Munich, 19 February 2024, order of the Court of first instance, UPC_CFI_9/2023

LD Munich, 19 February 2024, order of the Court of first instance, UPC_CFI_9/2023

Ronja Schregle

1 min Reading time

Table of Contents

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

Download decision(s) (PDF)

Key takeaways

Example of exercise of the case management powers of the court under R. 334 RoP.

✓

A videoconference with the parties can be designated a separate hearing under Rule 334(d) RoP, which does not preclude an interim conference under Rule 35(b) RoP.

Division

Local Division Munich

UPC number

UPC_CFI_9/2023

Type of proceedings

Infringement Action

Parties

Claimant: Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd

Defendant: NETGEAR Deutschland GmbH; Netgear Inc.; Netgear International Limited

Patent(s)

EP3611989

Body of legislation / Rules

R. 336 RoP; R. 334 RoP, R. 105 RoP

2024-02-19 LD Munich UPC_CFI_ 9-2023 App_6074-2024 CFI_9-2023 ACT_459771-2023 anonymizedDownload

Was the article helpful?

Categories

Tags

More exciting articles on similar topics

Content not to be missed

  • Munich Local Division

    LD Munich, November 21, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_550/2024

    The Rules of Procedure of the UPC do not contain a principle according to which evidence for factual allegations arising from the action may no longer be submitted by the party to the action after the action has been filed.: According to Rule 172.2 RoP, the Court may at any stage of the proceedings order …
    →
  • Local Division, Munich Local Division

    LD Munich, October 11, 2024, cost decision, UPC_CFI_292/2023

    No retroactive extension of time period for requesting costs under R. 151 RoP: The Court held that Rule 320 RoP, concerning the restitution of rights, is the lex specialis (more specific rule) and takes precedence over the general provision of Rule 9.3(a) RoP when a party misses a deadline and seeks to restore its right to …
    →
  • Munich Local Division

    LD Munich, October 2, 2024, Substantive Order, UPC_CFI_153/2024

    Patent pool administrators have a direct legal interest in litigations concerning patents within their pools: The court, referencing Rule 313 of the Rules of Procedure of the Unified Patent Court (RoP), affirmed that a patent pool administrator possesses a direct and present legal interest in the outcome of such a lawsuit.  This interest stems from …
    →

Stay in the loop

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

* = Required field