Institutions: Duesseldorf Local Division
- Brussels Local Division
- Central Division
- Duesseldorf Local Division
- Hamburg Local Division
- Helsinki Local Division
- Lisbon Local Division
- Local Division
- Luxembourg Court of Appeal
- Mannheim Local Division
- Milan Central Division
- Milan Local Division
- Munich Central Division
- Munich Local Division
- Nordic-Baltic Regional Division
- Paris Central Division
- Paris Local Division
- President of Court of First Instance
- Regional Division
- The Hague Local Division
- Vienna Local Division
-
LD Duesseldorf, April 22, 2025, order on costs, UPC_CFI_16/2024, UPC_CFI_121/2025, UPC_CFI_124/2025, UPC_CFI_626/2024
Recoverable costs must be reasonable and proportionate: “Reasonable” essentially means necessary. Based on the ex-ante standpoint of a reasonable and economically sound party, the decisive factor is whether the cost-incurring measure appeared objectively necessary and suitable to achieve the legitimate procedural objective. The measure must therefore have appeared appropriate for the prosecution or defense of…
5 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, April 10, 2025, Decision on infringement, UPC_CFI_50/2024
Claim Interpretation of Product-by-Process Claims : Product-by-process claims should be interpreted based on the technical features imparted to the product by the process, not the process itself (Art. 69 EPC, Protocol on the Interpretation of Art. 69 EPC). The court held that the key feature in this case was the ability to create a structural…
5 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Duesseldorf, March 26, 2025, evidence preservation measures, UPC_CFI_260/2025
Ex parte inspection order granted to preserve evidence at a trade fair: The Court granted an ex parte order for inspection and evidence preservation under Article 60 UPC and Rules 194, 196, 197, and 199 RoP. The Applicant successfully argued that the inspection was urgent due to the limited availability of the allegedly infringing products…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, March 21, 2025, UPC_CFI_76/2024, order on withdrawal of complaint, UPC_CFI_76/2024
Cost reimbursement in case of withdrawal of infringement action and counterclaim for revocation : If the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation are withdrawn by the parties, 60% of the court fees can be reimbursed Division Local Division Düsseldorf UPC number UPC_CFI_76/2024 Type of proceedings Infringement action, counterclaim for revocation Parties Claimant: Hand Held…
1 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, March 4, 2025, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_468/2024, UPC_CFI_687/2024
Referral of Counterclaim for Revocation (Art. 33(3)(b) UPCA, R. 37.2 RoP): The Local Division Düsseldorf referred the counterclaim for revocation to the Central Division in Milan. The Parties had unanimously requested the, and requests by all parties will be granted unless strongcounterarguments require a different decision (UPC_CFI 14/2023 (LD Munich), Order of 2 February2024 –…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, March 7, 2025, Decision of Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_459/2023
Late submission of new attacks on validity: The nullity plaintiffs raised two new validity attacks during the oral hearing: a novelty attack based on D7 (Onsemi) and an inventive step attack combining D3 (Nguyen) and D4 (Lürkens). Neither of these new attacks was considered, as they were raised for the first time during the oral…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, March 04, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_115/2024, UPC_CFI_377/2024
Denial of additional written submissions (R. 36 RoP): The judge-rapporteur can permit additional submissions only if a justified request is made before the conclusion of the written procedure. The court denied both parties’ requests for additional written submissions due to non-compliance with procedural rules. Timing and justification of requests (R. 36 RoP) : The claimant’s…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, December 3, 2024, Order re. procedural security against Defendant, UPC_CFI_140/2024
1. Not only the claimant but also the defendant may be ordered to provide security for legal costs within the meaning of R. 158 RoP.: (pp. 5 et seq.) Contrary to the Defendant´s position, this does not mean that Rule 158 RoP is in conflict with the UPCA. The power to order the provision of…
6 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, November 29, 2024, request for simultaneous interpretation, UPC_CFI_355/2023
Discretionary interpretation: The UPC retains discretion in granting simultaneous interpretation, even when a party requests it. Rules 109.1 and 109.2(1) RoP highlight the Judge-Rapporteur’s authority to decide whether and to what extent simultaneous interpretation is appropriate. If the Judge-Rapporteur refuses the request for simultaneous interpretation, a party may, at its own expense, engage a simultaneous…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, November 29, 2024, procedural order rejecting submission, UPC_CFI_355/2023
Absent a reasoned request, and consequently a decision allowing further submissions, the Court will rejcect any submissions made after the stipulated periods.: Pursuant to R. 36 RoP, the judge-rapporteur may, on a reasoned request by a party, allow further written submissions to be exchanged within a period to be specified.In the case at hand, the…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, November 20, 2024, procedural order, UPC_CFI_347/2024 and UPC_CFI_368/2024
“Obvious slips” within the meaning of R. 353 RoP, which allow the Court to rectify a decision or order, are all incorrect or incomplete statements of what the Court actually intended in the order or decision. In other words, the declaration of the Court’s intention in the decision or order must deviate from the intention…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, November 21, 2024, Order on joint hearing of both infringement action and counterclaim for revocation, UPC_CFI_499/2023
Joint hearing of both infringement action and counterclaim for revocation: The local division exercises its discretion to hear both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation (Art. 33(3)(a) UPCA). Such a joint hearing of the infringement action and the counterclaim seems to be appropriate in particular for reasons of efficiency. It is also preferable…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, November 20, 2024, Request for Extension of Time Limits, UPC_CFI_499/2023
Fairness and Equity regarding Extension of Time Limits: Defendants have not consented to the extension of the time limits. However, the requested extension is justified on the grounds of fairness and equity (see the 5th recital in the Preamble to the Rules of Procedure), since the previous time limit was, with the consent of the…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, October 30, 2024, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_355/2023
R. 36 RoP: Filing of Pleadings Beyond Time Limits Specified in RoP Possible: The fact that the claimant has only one opportunity to submit written observations on the right of prior use is a consequence of the Rules of procedure and the time limits laid down therein. However, in order to give the claimant the…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Duesseldorf, October 31, 2024, Decision, UPC_CFI_373/2023
Preferred Embodiments Not Limiting for Claims: The claim must not be limited to the scope of preferred embodiments. The scope of a claim extends to subject-matter that the skilled person understands as the patentee’s claim after interpretation using the description and drawings. A claim interpretation which is supported by the description and drawings as a…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Dusseldorf, October 31, 2024, order on provisional measures, UPC_CFI_368/024
No uniform urgency period.: The urgency period is to be measured from the date on which the applicant is or should have been aware of the infringement. Whether a delay is unreasonable depends on the circumstances of the individual case. There is no fixed deadline by which the applicant must submit its application for provisional…
7 min Reading time→ -
LD Düsseldorf, September 6, 2024, panel review order re. security for costs, UPC_CFI_373/2023, ORD_48181/2024
Confirmation of legal standard: it is a discretionary decision to order a security for legal costs and other expenses; imposing of a security serves to protect the position and (potential) rights of the Defendant : Factors to be considered (following CoA, UPC_CoA_328/2024; CD Munich, UPC_CFI_252/2023; LD Paris, UPC_495/2023): financial position of the other party that…
3 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.