Home » UPC decisions » Local Division » Munich Local Division

Institutions: Munich Local Division

  • LD Munich, June 6, 2025, decision, UPC_CFI_324/2024, UPC_CFI_487/2024

    Burden of proof for non-infringement: If the defendant claims that infringement is impossible due to factors outside the scope of the patent claim, the defendant must prove this. The claimant does not need to address such external factors. In the decision, the defendant unsuccessfully argued that infringement was impossible due to the design of existing…

    5 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, May 28, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_63/2025

    Ex parte evidence preservation and inspection orders may be granted if the applicant provides sufficient evidence of likely infringement (Art. 60 UPCA, Rules 192, 197.3 RoP).: The court will grant such orders without hearing the defendant if the applicant submits all reasonably available evidence supporting a likelihood of patent infringement or threat thereof. The review…

    4 min Reading time
    →
  • Contact us personally!

    Contact us personally!

    Tips and advice directly from our Unitary Patents professionals.

    Make an inquiry now
  • ,

    LD Munich, April 14, 2025, procedural order concerning R. 303 RoP, UPC_CFI_149/2025

    Separation of proceedings is at the Court’s discretion (Rule 303(2) RoP).: The Court may separate proceedings involving multiple defendants, but such decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, considering procedural efficiency and fairness to all parties. Joint proceedings are favored for procedural economy, especially when claims involve the same infringing embodiment.: In this case, hearing…

    3 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Munich, 14 April 2025, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_127/2024

    Discretion to separate proceedings, Rule 303(2) RoP: The UPC has the discretion to separate proceedings involving multiple defendants. When deciding whether to separate, the court will consider procedural efficiency and whether any party would be unfairly disadvantaged. In this case, the court identified arguments both for and against seperation. While the proceedings against some defendants…

    3 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Munich, 14 April 2025, Procedural Order, UPC_CFI_119/2025

    Service of legal documents does not require actual physical receipt: As per Rule 271.6.b RoP, service is deemed effective even if physical acceptance of a document is refused, as long as the addressee was properly notified and had a reasonable opportunity to collect it. In this case, the defendant’s inaction in collecting the statement of…

    4 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, April 17, 2025, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_846/2024

    A preliminary objection may relate to a part of an infringement action only: Defendants’ objection to the UPC’s jurisdiction over acts commited prior to the start of the UPC is admissible. Possible UPC jurisdiction on infringing actions solely occurred before June 1, 2023: Defendant states in its preliminary objection that one attacked embodiment was only…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, April 4, 2025, Decision on infringement and counterclaim for revocation, UPC_CFI_501/2023

    Jurisdiction over multiple defendants with commercial relationship and same infringement (Art. 33(1)(b) UPCA).: Multiple defendants can be sued at the domicile, principal place of business, or place of business of one defendant if they have a commercial relationship and the action concerns the same alleged infringement (“anchor-defendant”). Headnote 1 of the decision clarifies: In the…

    4 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Munich, April 2, 2025, Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_18/2025

    Opt-out withdrawals must clearly identify the patent but don’t require listing every state where it’s valid: The Court found that listing member states in the withdrawal solely in the context of identifying the proprietor was sufficient. Including states where the patent was granted (Art. 97(1) EPC) but not validated didn’t invalidate the withdrawal. Sufficient infringement…

    2 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Munich, March 31, 2025, Order of the Court of First Instance, UPC_CFI_425/2024

    Patent owners are not restricted in amending patents to counterclaims for revocation: The patentee may also request amendments to the patent that are not directly related to the grounds for invalidity arising from the counterclaim. The purpose of Rule 30 RoP is to give the patentee the opportunity to ‘save’ its patent in an amended…

    4 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, March 17, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_815/2024

    A decision for an implied R. 262.2 RoP application is normally only warranted where a third party makes an application under R. 262.3 RoP, but there may be exceptions to allow the case to proceed: With a previous order dated 23 January 2025 (ORD_3866/2025), the Court referred to a previous order from the Central Division…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, March 18, 2025, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_339/2024

    Neither the alleged incompatibility of the UPCA with EU law nor the alleged violation of the right to a lawful judge constitutes a valid ground for a preliminary objection.: According to Rule 19.1 RoP, a preliminary objection is strictly limited to the following formal procedural grounds: (a) the jurisdiction and competence of the UPC, (b)…

    3 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, March 19, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_425/2024

    Background of the case: The Applicants request a security for costs under R.158 RoP by arguing that Respondent has its registered office in the People’s Republic of China so that it is alleged that it was not sufficiently certain that a cost decision would be accepted and could be enforced in China. The Respondent countered…

    4 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, March 11, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_201/2024

    Timely lodging of statement of claim upon order of provisional measures: payment of court fees relevant (not timing of receipt): The applicant of provisional measures has to “start proceedings on the merits” of the case within 31 calendar days (or 20 working days, whichever is longer) from the date specified in the Court’s order (R.…

    2 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, February 28, 2025, Order, UPC_CFI_483/2024

    Amendment of case (Rule 263 RoP): The claimant sought to amend the case to include the Netherlands after the patent was restored there. The application was made under Rule 263 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP) of the Unified Patent Court (UPC). Reasonable Diligence Requirement (Rule 263.2(a) RoP) : The claimant failed to demonstrate reasonable…

    3 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, February 24, 2025, decision regarding award of costs, UPC_CFI_2/2023

    In PI-proceedings an application for the determination of costs pursuant to R. 151 RoP is admissible in the event that the Court of Appeal has issued a basic decision on costs pursuant to R. 242.1RoP.: Pursuant to R. 150.1 RoP, the determination of costs may be the subject of separate proceedings following a decision on…

    3 min Reading time
    →

  • LD Munich, February 25, 2025, Reimbursement of Court fees, UPC_CFI_208/2023, UPC_CFI_220/2024, UPC_CFI_221/2024

    Reimbursement of Court fees should be proportionate to efforts already made by the Court : The purpose of R. 370.9 (b) and (e) RoP on reimbursement of fees in case of a withdrawal of an action is to ensure that the reimbursement is proportionate to the efforts already made by the Court. A complex patent…

    2 min Reading time
    →
  • ,

    LD Munich, February 14, 2025, order on preliminary objection, UPC_CFI_437/2024

    A preliminary objection based on questions regarding the claimant’s standing to bring an action is inadmissible or at least unfounded.: The Court’s jurisdiction and competence, as referred to in R. 19.1 RoP, is not linked to whether a person bringing an action is ultimately entitled to bring the action or whether it is fully entitled…

    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