Home » UPC decisions » Page 2

UPC Decisions

  • LD The Hague, August 29, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_684/2024

    Claim interpretation: Feature 1.6 of claim 1 in the patent-in-suit (EP 1651838) was central to both infringement and validity. The dispute between the parties concerned, inter alia, the meaning of the wording “turning movements” in feature 1.6. The opposing views: o     City Glass: “Turning movement” means an actual rotation (not just a torque). o     Maars:…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, August 22, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_248/2024

    Indications of purpose in a device claim: 1. Indications of purpose in a device claim regularly define a device in such a way that it must be suitable for use for the function and purpose specified in the patent claim. 2. If a device claim contains an indication of purpose, the only factor relevant for…

    6 min Reading time
    →
  • Contact us personally!

    Contact us personally!

    Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.

    Make an inquiry now

  • CoA, August 25, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CoA_758/2015 and UPC_CoA_759/2025

    Application for suspensive effect (R. 223 RoP): Although R.223.5 RoP provides that there shall be no suspensive effect for an order pursuant to (amongst other) R.220.2 RoP, the Court of Appeal considers that this does not preclude that an application for suspensive effect is lodged – and if justified, granted – for such orders based…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, August 26, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_487/2023

    Public access to the register: A law firm, as a member of the public, shall be granted access to pleadings and evidence upon submission of a reasoned request, pursuant to Rule 262.1 RoP. A reasoned request, in this sense, is a request that not only specifies the pleadings and evidence to which access is sought,…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, August 26, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_248-2025

    Security for costs: The court may, pursuant to Art. 64(4) UPCA and R.158.1 RoP, at its own discretion and upon the defendant’s application, order the provision of security for the costs of the proceedings and any other costs of the party, taking into account the facts and arguments presented by the parties. In doing so,…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Mannheim, August 27, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_521/2024

    Rejection of submission: The court may, at its discretion, disregard not only unsolicited written submissions in addition to the regular written pleadings provided for in the RoP, but also the content of regular written pleadings that goes beyond the admissible content provided for in the RoP. This applies not only to new arguments or facts,…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Hamburg, August 25, 2025, final order, UPC_CFI_688/2025

    Representation and service: A lawyer authorised to represent a party in a proceeding on provisional measures is not automatically authorised to represent the same party in a subsequent infringement actionconcerning the same patent, even if there is a link between the two proceedings (cf. e.g. Article 32.2 UPCA and Rule 213 RoP). Hence, the defendant’s…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • Court of Appeal, August 13, 2025, order concerning an application for provisional measures, UPC_CoA_446/2025, UPC_CoA_520/2025

    Mere marketing authorisation for generics does not constitute imminent infringement (Art. 62(1) UPCA; R. 206.2(c) RoP): The grant or application for a marketing authorisation alone is insufficient to establish imminent infringement. Additional steps are required for the threshold to be met, and the Court of Appeal clarified that this threshold can be crossed when a…

    5 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD The Hague, August 13, 2025, decision on the merits, UPC_CFI_327/2024

    Cost decision on a counterclaim for revocation: If the patent is considered valid only in a form which is not claimed to be infringed, the patentee shall bear the costs of the counterclaim for revocation. However, if the counter claimant seeks revocation of claims not asserted against it, and those claims are upheld, a compensation…

    4 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Düsseldorf, August 5, 2025, Default Judgment, UPC_CFI_318/2025

    Default judgment is available if the defendant fails to respond (R. 355 RoP, R. 23 RoP): The court may issue a default judgment if the defendant does not file a statement of defense within the prescribed period, provided service of the complaint was validly effected. Service at trade fair booths is valid for UPC proceedings…

    3 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Mannheim, August 4, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_162/2024

    Discretionary extension of time periods is interpreted narrowly (Rule 9.3(a) RoP): The court will only grant extensions for procedural deadlines with caution, prioritizing efficient proceedings and avoiding undue delay. Vacation-related absences may justify short extensions, but only if sufficiently substantiated (Rule 9.3(a) RoP): General references to staff absences or international coordination are insufficient; only specific,…

    3 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Mannheim, August 6, 2025, procedural order, UPC_CFI_336/2025

    Confidentiality of attorney billing records in cost proceedings (Rule 262A RoP, Art. 58 UPCA): Information about the detailed breakdown of lawyers’ hours worked is considered confidential, as such information is protected by attorney-client privilege. Access restrictions to confidential information cannot be limited to legal representatives alone without consent (Rule 262A.6 RoP): Restricting access to confidential…

    3 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    CD Paris, July 28, 2025, decision in revocation action, UPC_CFI_239/2024

    Claim construction: While terms used in patent documents should be given their normal meaning in the relevant art, the description and the drawings, when considered in the context of document’s contents and not in isolation, may give these terms a different meaning. In the case at hand, the Court affirmed, applying this principle, that according…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Mannheim, July 25, 2025, Procedural Order on Enforcement of Saisie Order, UPC_CFI_636/2025

    Saisie Order is Limited to Systems and Evidence Physically Available at Designated Premises: The inspection may only cover what is physically present at the premises explicitly named in the court order. A defendant is not obliged to grant access to systems or data stored outside the specified premises, nor to coordinate with personnel or infrastructure…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Mannheim, July 29, 2025, Order on Request to Dismiss Infringement Action Due to Lack of Domestic Representative

    Domestic Representative under German Patent Act Not Required for UPC Proceedings: The LD Mannheim clarified that Section 25(1) of the German Patent Act (GPA), which requires foreign patentees to appoint a domestic representative for proceedings before German authorities, does not apply to infringement actions before the UPC. The Court emphasized that the UPC is governed…

    2 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Düsseldorf July 30, 2025 Decision on merits, UPC_CFI_26/2024

    Late filed argument based on known document: The Court can reject a new line of arguments pursuant to R. 9.2 RoP in a case where the issue has been raised from the outset and the new argument is based on completely different passages of a lengthy document. Neither the Court nor the other party may…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Mannheim, July 23, 2025, order on penalty payments, UPC_CFI_365/2023

    Penalties should be proportionate to the value of the dispute and the level of non-compliance: The Court considered the proportionality of the penalties in relation to the value of the dispute (€15,000,000) and the defendants’ actions. The penalty system aims to encourage compliance while allowing for increasing sanctions for continued violations. Neither R. 354.3 or…

    2 min Reading time
    →

    Stay in the loop

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

    * = Required field