Institutions: Local Division
-
LD Brussels, September 3, 2026, procedural order on time limits after stay of proceedings is lifted, UPC_CFI_871/2026
Rule 296.3 RoP is to be understood to mean that, after stayed proceedings are resumed, the applicable time limits continue to run from the date of the order resuming the proceedings, taking into account the time limits that had already expired prior to the stay of the proceedings.: Rule 296.3 RoP reads as follows: “While…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, September 2, 2026, decision, UPC_CFI_297/2025, UPC_CFI_651/2025
The Düsseldorf Local Division partially upheld the patent-in-suit, which relates to “SHARING MULTIMEDIA CONTENT IN A PEER-TO-PEER CONFIGURATION”, and found that the patent in its upheld version was indirectly infringed by the Disney+ streaming service. The decision focusses on claim construction, validity and some procedural aspects, applying the UPC’s established case law, for example regarding…
3 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
Local Division Düsseldorf, September 1, 2026, Decision on Infringement Action, UPC_CFI_307/2025
Rule 116.3 RoP governs the consequences of a party’s non-attendance at the oral hearing, treating them as relying on their written submissions.: If a defendant fails to attend the oral hearing despite being properly summoned, the court may proceed to issue a final decision on the merits rather than a default judgment under Rule 116.5…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Hamburg, August 24, 2026, Decision on Infringement Action with Counterclaim for Revocation, UPC_CFI_495/2025 and UPC_CFI_494/2025
A SEP holder is only required to offer a single FRAND-compliant licensing route: pool or bilateral (hn. 1): Competition law does not require a patent holder to offer both a pool licence and a bilateral licence; indicating one route that meets FRAND requirements is sufficient, aligning with prior LD Munich case law (Huawei v Netgear).…
5 min Reading time→ -
LD Hamburg, August 25, 2025, Order on Application for Provisional Measures, UPC_CFI_1535/2026
For the assessment of urgency it is relevant when the applicant was able to physically obtain and examine the potentially infringing product: Information obtained earlier is only relevant if such information (e.g. drawings) allow applicant to determine with sufficient certainty whether the potentially infringing product is infringing the patent in suit. The applicant of preliminary…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, August 25, 2026, Decision on Infringement Action, UPC_CFI_56/2025, UPC_CFI_864/2025
Direct infringement of a product claim turns on objective capability, not the manufacturer’s intended or recommended use: For direct infringement of a product claim under Art. 25(a) UPCA, the decisive factor is whether the accused embodiment is, due to its nature and suitability for use, objectively capable of fulfilling the claim features; regardless of the…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, August 21, 2026, Order on the Release of Information in Inspection and Preservation Proceedings, UPC_CFI_1696/2025
Scope of disclosure in the inspection and preservation proceedings (Art. 58 UPCA): A three-step test governs the scope of disclosure of a detailed description to an applicant in inspection and preservation proceedings (Art. 58 UPCA) – Continuing of earlier LD Düsseldorf decision (UPC_CFI_539/2024, November 19, 2025, headnotes 1–3 – Bekaert v. Siltronic). First, it must…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Brussels, August 17, 2026, Order on Admission of Auxiliary Request, UPC_CFI_806/2025, UPC_CFI_185/2026
An amendment to a party’s case cannot be allowed if it could have been foreseen from the outset of the proceedings (R. 263 RoP, R. 30.2 RoP): Granting leave to amend at a late stage would allow the applicant to change its litigation strategy after the fact. A diligent patentee should coordinate its EPO and…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Munich, August 17, 2026, Decision on Conditional Counterclaims for Revocation and Cost Allocation, UPC_CFI_492/2025, UPC_CFI_1309/2025
It is permissible to make a counterclaim for revocation conditional upon a finding of infringement of the patent: The court relied on the Court of Appeal’s Clarification order of 16 July 2026 (UPC_CoA_40/2026, Emboline v. AorticLab), confirming that the procedural approach of making the decision on the revocation counterclaim dependent on an infringement finding is…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Brussels, August 14, 2026, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_1357/2025, UPC_CFI_629/2026
A request for further pleadings must be explicit — hints inside a pleading are not enough: LABS answered the Defendants’ new arguments directly inside its Rejoinder, without filing a formal request at that point. The Court said this does not count. R. 36 RoP needs a clear, stand-alone request. There is no such thing as…
7 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, August 17, 2026, Order, UPC_CFI_1034/2025, UPC_CFI_931/2026
An “attorneys’ eyes only” regime needs the consent of the party losing access rights (R. 262A.6 RoP): A confidentiality order must give at least one natural person per party access, plus their legal representatives. The Court can only exclude all natural persons of a party if that party agrees. A simple objection kills the request.…
7 min Reading time→ -
LD Paris, August 19, 2026, Infringement action with conditional counterclaim for revocation, UPC_CFI_301/2025 and UPC_CFI_713/2025
Making a counterclaim for revocation conditional upon a finding of infringement is permissible under Art. 33(3) UPCA and promotes procedural economy.: Where the defendant requests, and the claimant does not object, that the counterclaim be decided only if infringement is found, the court may examine infringement first and defer the validity analysis to a later…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Hamburg, order of August 10, 2026, order on provisional measures, UPC_CFI_1321/2026
Asserting claims in a form narrower than the granted (independent) claims in proceedings for provisional measures is admissible: Relying on a claim combination narrower than any of the granted claims does not, in principle, preclude the ordering of provisional measures (cf. headnote 1). Auxiliary requests in proceedings for provisional measures may be inadmissible if features hail…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD The Hague, August 10, 2026, infringement action, counterclaim for revocation, UPC_CFI_251/2025, UPC_CFI_769/2025
Interim conference reduced the number of auxiliary requests and prior art documents: Following the order issued after the interim conference, Maxell reduced the number of auxiliary requests from 44 to 10. Samsung, which had originally cited 24 documents against the main request and the auxiliary requests, correspondingly reduced its attacks against the main request to…
5 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, August 11, 2026, Order on Change of Language of Proceedings, UPC_CFI_2082/2026
A claimant’s demonstrated capacity to litigate in English in comparable proceedings may outweigh party size and domicile in a change-of-language decision under Art. 49(5) UPCA, R. 323 RoP (cf. headnote, mn. 21).: Under the CoA case law (Order of 17 April 2024, UPC_CoA_101/2024, para. 22-25 and Order of 18 September 2024, UPC_CoA_354/2024, para. 26-27), changing…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, July 23, 2026, order on request for file inspection, UPC_CFI_7/2023
Once the Court has issued a final decision or order concluding first-instance proceedings, the public generally has an interest in accessing the pleadings and evidence: Access to the pleadings and evidence fosters a better understanding of the decision in light of the parties’ arguments and the evidence relied upon, and enables judicial scrutiny, which is…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, August 04, 2026, Confirmation by the Court of a settlement, UPC_CFI_1536/2026
A confirmation by the Court of a settlement can be enforced as a decision of the Court.: This follows from R. 365(1)S.1 RoP. Where applicable, the settlement agreement will be entered in the Register in redacted form only. Division LD Düsseldorf UPC number UPC_CFI_1536/2026 Type of proceedings Confirmation by the Court of a settlement Parties…
1 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.