Institutions: Mannheim 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 Mannheim, June 6, 2025, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_745/2024 (CCR: UPC_CFI_200/2025)
No special treatment for amendments in counterclaims for revocation: The Rules of Procedure on amendments apply equally to counterclaims for revocation as to infringement actions; no leniency is afforded to counterclaimants. All grounds for revocation and supporting documents must be included with the initial counterclaim. Late-filed prior art faces strict scrutiny: New prior art can…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, June 6, 2025, Decision, UPC_CFI_471/2023
No equivalent infringement without essentially the same effect : According to all doctrines of equivalence or equivalence tests of the UPC contracting member states, equivalent patent infringement is ruled out if there is no technical-functional equivalence of the substitute means in the sense that the modified means do not perform essentially the same function in…
4 min Reading time→ -
Contact us personally!
Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.
-
LD Mannheim, June 3, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_365/2023
Pre-emptive enforcement warning rejected: Applications for advance warnings of penalties for non-compliance are likely to be rejected if the court has already exercised discretion on enforcement. The claimant’s request for a warning of daily penalties was denied, as the court had already decided not to set such terms in the main proceedings. Time period for…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, May 28, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_410/2023
No reimbursement of court fees after withdrawal on the eve of the pronouncement of the decision on the merrits.: Assuming an exceptional case pursuant to R 370.9 (e) RoP, the court denies the reimbursement of court fees. The court points out that at the time of withdrawal, the decision was fully drafted and signed and…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, 2 April 2025, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_365/2023
The UPC has no jurisdiction over a European Patent with regard to those national parts of UPCA member states which have already lapsed before 1 June 2023. The same applies to national parts of non-UPCA-member states: Without prejudice to Art. 83 UPCA, Art. 3 (c) UPCA vests upon the UPC jurisdiction over any pre-existing European…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, 2 April 2025, Decision of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_359/2023
Strict Application Principle for Amending Patents in Defense Against Revocation: Art. 76 (1) UPCA contains a strict application principle. Accordingly, a patent proprietor, who wishes to defend its patent in a limited version, has to submit a clear and comprehensive Application to amend the patent. This includes situations where the proprietor wishes to rely on…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, order of April 23, 2025, UPC_CFI_471/2023
Order for the preparation of the oral hearing: The Court issued an order for the preparation and structuring of the oral hearing. It highlights a number of key aspects and questions which, in the preliminary opinion of the judge-rapporteur, are likely to be of importance in the oral proceedings. The highlighted aspects are not exhaustive…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, April 9, 2025, request to separate proceedings, UPC_CFI_819/2024
No separation of proceedings to avoid potential conflicts with EU competition law: Where several defendants belong to different competing groups of companies, potential conflicts with EU competition law may arise from the submission of sensitive confidential information about a company’s business in the proceedings. If these conflicts arise solely from the fact that the defendants…
1 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, April 4, 2025, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_750/2024
Questions of fact and law relevant to jurisdiction and to the merits of the case are not dealt with in the preliminary objection procedure according to R. 19.1 RoP: Questions of fact and law that are relevant both to jurisdiction of the UPCA and to the merits of the case are, in principle, not to…
4 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, April 2, 2025, order on Preliminary Objection, UPC_CFI_819/2024
Multiple Defendants may be sued in one action provided that the infringement has occured in the CMS hosting the Local Division, irrespective of a “commercial relationship”: Claimant submitted in its Statement of claim sufficient facts, which establish competence of the Local Division Mannheim for each and every defendant under Art. 33(1)(a)UPCA, which is reinforced by…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, April 1, 2025, Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_132/2024
UPC sets strict limitations on requests for filing further briefs: The UPC emphasizes procedural efficiency and limits deviations from the standard briefing schedule outlined in Rule 12 RoP. Requests for further briefs must be explicitly justified and supported by specific evidence, outlining the necessity for exceeding the standard two mandatory and two optional briefs. Request…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, March 27, 2025, request for information, UPC_CFI_471/2023
Request to determine that information is not relevant to the decision is inadmissible: The Court found that an application to declare requested information is not relevant to the decision is inadmissible. The decisiveness of the requested information can only be determined after oral proceedings, assessment of the patent’s validity and the sufficiency of the arguments…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, March 26, 2025, file inspection, UPC_CFI_210/2023
File inspection granted to a limited extent: The applicant’s request for file inspection (applicant: a partnership of lawyers under German law specializing in intellectual property law invoking a general interest in information in order to gain a better understanding and knowledge of proceedings before the UPC) is granted to a limited extent in accordance of…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, March 11, 2025, orders, UPC_CFI_159/2024, UPC_CFI_162/2024
If infringement proceedings are ready for decision with regard to single national parts, decision should not be withheld if this would delay enforcement: This decision has gained relevance in light of the recent decisions on the long-arm jurisdiction (cf. CJEU, BSH v Electrolux (C-339/22); UPC LD Dusseldorf, Fujifilm v Kodak (UPC_CFI_355/2023) according to which the…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, March 11, 2025, decisions, UPC_CFI_159/2024, UPC_CFI_162/2024
Infringement of traditional European patents (“bundle patents”): The applicable substantive law depends on whether the act was committed after the entry into force of the UPCA on June 1, 2023 (then UPCA), before (then national laws), or is “ongoing” (then generally UPCA with exceptions).: If the assertedly infringing act was committed after the entry into…
3 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, January 31, 2025, Decision of first instance (Infringement Proceedings and Counterclaim for Revocation), UPC_CFI_340/2023
In view of the lack of patentability, the admissible infringement action is unfounded without the need for a judicial review of the infringement allegation required.: After the court has dealt with the interpretation of the patent-in-suit and established the invalidity of the patent-in-suit, it dismissed the infringement action without further ado. Both the examination of…
2 min Reading time→ -
LD Mannheim, January 22, 2025, procedural order in infringement action, UPC_CFI_365/2023
Document submission one week before the hearing: The hearing dates are confirmed for three consecutive days, i.e., February 11-13, 2025. The Court provides remarks in preparation for the hearing and requests the upload of documents or sketches by February 4, 2025. The documents or sketches are those, which the parties may wish to refer to…
2 min Reading time→
Stay in the loop
Never miss a beat by subscribing to the email newsletter. Please see our Privacy Policy.