Patent Cases

12,313 decisions across India · European UPC · US PTAB

India 4,815 European UPC 1,878 US PTAB 5,620

Page 4 of 411

patent LITIGATION · Aug 13, 2026

bioletic Holding GmbH & Co.KG., gesetzlich vertreten durch d v.Respondent

The Local Chamber Düsseldorf issued an order concerning the suspension of cost determination proceedings related to European Patent EP 3685783. The applicant, bioletic Holding GmbH & Co.KG., had previously had its ex-parte application for provisional measures rejected and was ordered to bear costs, with its appeal also dismissed. The respondents sought reimbursement of their appeal costs, but the court suspended the cost determination proceedings until the final resolution of the main infringement action and counterclaim for revocation pending before the Local Chamber Munich.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 13, 2026

Sibio Technology Limited, Kowloon, Hong Kong v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Alameda, United States of America, LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

Paris Central Division · UPC_6EB8B77819

This is an appeal by Sibio Technology Limited against a decision of the Paris Central Division that dismissed its revocation action concerning European Patent EP 3 831 283 and maintained the patent as granted. Sibio argued that the subject matter of independent claims 1 and 15 extended beyond the original application disclosure (added matter) and that all claims lacked inventive step over the cited prior art. The Court of Appeal addressed the legal principles concerning intermediate generalisation and the relevance of technical effects in assessing added matter, ultimately ruling on the validity of the patent.

patent interim order · Aug 13, 2026

The North Face Apparel Corp v.Assistant Controller Patents and Designs

Delhi High Court - Orders · C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 26/2026

The North Face Apparel Corp filed an appeal under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970 before the Delhi High Court challenging an order dated 02.01.2026 passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs in Indian Patent Application No. 202117018485. A separate application seeking condonation of a 9-day delay in refiling the appeal was allowed. Notice was issued to the Respondent, who accepted notice and was granted one week to file a reply, with the matter listed for hearing on 01.09.2026.

patent interim order · Aug 12, 2026

Haw Par Corporation Limited v.Rangoon Chemicals Works Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Calcutta High Court · IPDATM/252/2023

This matter concerns an application (GA-COM/1/2026) filed by Haw Par Corporation Limited on 5th August, 2026, seeking restoration of its earlier application (IPDATM 252 of 2023), which had been dismissed for default by an order dated 27th November, 2024. Before the Calcutta High Court's Intellectual Property Rights Division, the Court noted that service of the restoration application was not yet complete. The matter was directed to appear in the monthly list of October, 2026.

patent interim order · Aug 12, 2026

Haw Par Brothers International Limited v.Rangoon Chemicals Works Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Calcutta High Court · IPDATM/249/2023

This is an order of the Calcutta High Court (Intellectual Property Rights Division) in an interlocutory application (IA No. GA-COM/1/2026) filed in the main proceeding IPDATM/249/2023. The petitioner, Haw Par Brothers International Limited, sought restoration of the main application, which had been dismissed for default by an order dated 27th November, 2024. The court noted that service of the restoration application, filed on 7th August, 2026, was not yet complete and directed the matter to appear in the monthly list of October, 2026.

patent mixed · Aug 12, 2026

M/S KRBL Limited v.M/S J.R. Rice India Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 701/2016

The Plaintiff, M/S KRBL Limited, filed a suit seeking a permanent injunction against the Defendants from using the trademark 'ROYAL GATE' with the device of 'INDIA GATE' on the ground of passing off, since the INDIA GATE mark was unregistered at the time of filing. During the pendency of the suit, the Plaintiff acquired registered rights in the INDIA GATE trademark (No. 599833 in Class 30) via an Assignment Deed dated 06.08.2019, and the mark was subsequently declared a well-known trademark. The Plaintiff sought to amend the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to incorporate the registration and well-known status and add a claim of infringement. The Court allowed the amendment application, subject to the Plaintiff paying Rs. 50,000/- to the Delhi High Court Advocates Welfare Trust, finding that the basic structure of the suit remained unchanged.

patent settled · Aug 11, 2026

Metro Brands Limited v.Paul's Metro Shoe Shoppe & Ors. (Silas Paul Bandari, Xavier Paul Bandari, Murthy Anjali)

Bombay High Court · Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 21274 of 2026 with Interim Application (L) No. 21406 of 2026 and Leave Petition (L) No. 21432 of 2026

The Plaintiff, Metro Brands Limited, proprietor of the registered and prior-used trademark 'METRO' used since 1955 in footwear, filed a praecipe seeking withdrawal of the present Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 21274 of 2026 along with connected Interim Application and Leave Petition, with liberty to institute a fresh and comprehensive suit. The Plaintiff cited the inadvertent non-follow-up of earlier 2021 proceedings (Commercial Suit No. 314 of 2021) and the need to comprehensively plead all material facts and subsequent developments as grounds for withdrawal. The Bombay High Court allowed the withdrawal with liberty to file a fresh suit, permitted refund of court fees, and disposed of the connected interim application and leave petition.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 11, 2026

1- Google LLC, 2- Google Germany GmbH v.1- BF exaQC AG, 2- ParTec AG

Court of Appeal · UPC_AA048D0A17

The President of the Court of First Instance issued an order regarding an application by Google LLC and Google Germany GmbH (Defendants) to change the language of proceedings from German to English under Rule 323 RoP. The underlying infringement action was brought by BF exaQC AG and ParTec AG (Claimants) based on European patents EP3614263 and EP2164678. The Defendants argued that English should be used as the language of proceedings because it is the language in which the patents were granted, the working language of the Google group, and the predominant technical language in the field. The Claimants opposed the change, arguing that three of the four parties are domiciled in Germany, the Claimants are small entities compared to Google's resources, and their internal working language is German.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 11, 2026

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ), 21 Torshamnsgatan, K, Ericsson Telecomunicações, Lda., Lagoas Park, Edifício 4, Pi v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd., Unit 1, Floor 24, Chua, LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

Lisbon Local Division · UPC_24BA063976

This order of the Court of Appeal concerns three appeal proceedings (UPC-CoA-100/2026, UPC-CoA-101/2026, UPC-CoA-102/2026) brought by Shenzhen Transsion against an order of The Hague Local Division granting Ericsson's application for confidentiality measures in underlying infringement proceedings relating to three European patents in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. Following a settlement between the parties, Shenzhen Transsion applied to withdraw the appeals, and Ericsson consented. The Court permitted the withdrawal, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 50% of the appeal court fees (EUR 2,000) to Shenzhen Transsion.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 11, 2026

Edwards Lifesciences Corporation, 1 Edwards Way, 92614, Irvi v.Meril Gmbh, Bornheimer Straße 135-137 - 53119 - Bonn – DE, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd., M1‐M2, Meril Park, Survey No 1

Munich Local Division · UPC_067EE629FD

This order was issued by the Local Division Munich of the Unified Patent Court following an interim conference in proceedings concerning the determination of damages for infringement of European Patent No. 3 669 828. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation seeks damages and an order to lay open books against the Meril entities, which were previously found to have infringed the patent with respect to the Myval Transcatheter Heart Valve and the Myval System. The order sets procedural directions for the upcoming oral hearing, including deadlines for submissions, the value of the dispute (15 Mio. EUR), and arrangements for the videoconference hearing scheduled for 10 September 2026.

patent settled · Aug 11, 2026

Metro Brands Limited v.Paul's Metro Shoe Shoppe & Ors. (Silas Paul Bandari, Xavier Paul Bandari, Murthy Anjali)

Bombay High Court · Commercial IP Suit (L) No. 21274 of 2026 with IA (L) No. 21406 of 2026 and Leave Petition (L) No. 21432 of 2026

Metro Brands Limited, the proprietor of the registered and prior-used trademark 'METRO' (used since 1955 in relation to footwear), sought withdrawal of its 2026 commercial IP suit against Pauls Metro Shoe Shoppe and others with liberty to file a fresh suit. The plaintiff explained that an earlier 2021 suit (Commercial Suit No. 314 of 2021) against related defendants had inadvertently not been followed up, and the material facts of those earlier proceedings were not comprehensively incorporated in the present pleadings. The Bombay High Court allowed the withdrawal with liberty, permitted refund of court fees, and disposed of the connected interim application and leave petition.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology, Inc. v.ASUSTeK Computer, Inc., ASUS Computer GmbH

UPC Court · UPC_91CEA2222A

This decision by the Local Division Mannheim of the Unified Patent Court concerns the withdrawal of a patent infringement action and related counterclaims for revocation concerning EP 3 849 157, along with the proportional reimbursement of court fees. The parties mutually agreed to withdraw all proceedings before the closure of the written procedure and did not request a cost decision. The Court permitted the withdrawals and ordered 50% reimbursement of court fees to the Claimant, Defendant 2), and Defendant 1) in accordance with the applicable Rules of Procedure.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

Maxell, Ltd. v.Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.

The Hague - Local Division · UPC_F878C85C67

Maxell, Ltd., proprietor of European patent EP 2 061 230 relating to a portable terminal, information processing apparatus and content display system, sued Samsung Electronics entities for infringement of device claims 1, 2, 5 and 6 with Galaxy smartphones and tablets. Samsung counterclaimed for full revocation, alleging lack of novelty, lack of inventive step, and added matter. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (The Hague Local Division) found the patent invalid for lacking an inventive step and revoked it in its entirety, dismissing Maxell's infringement action and ordering Maxell to pay Samsung's costs.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.Moderna Netherlands B.V., Moderna Biotech Distributor UK Ltd

The Hague - Local Division · UPC_C0C65FC322

This order concerns proceedings involving two divisional European patents (EP4066856 and EP4226941) owned by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA (GSK) against multiple Moderna entities. Both patents were revoked at the European Patent Office: EP941 by the Opposition Division on June 24, 2026, and EP856 by the Technical Board of Appeal on July 20, 2026, both for lack of novelty. The Court disposed of the counterclaim action regarding EP856 as devoid of purpose, ordered GSK to bear Moderna's costs, and postponed its decision on whether to stay the remaining proceedings pending the written grounds of the TBA decision.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

Cybex GmbH, Riedingerstraße 18, 95448 Bayreuth, vertreten du v.Respondent

Court of Appeal · UPC_FCD084862B

Cybex GmbH sought preliminary measures against NUNA International B.V. and Allison GmbH before the Local Chamber Hamburg of the Unified Patent Court for alleged infringement of European Patent EP 4 242 056 B1, which relates to a child seat system comprising a seat element and a base mountable on a vehicle seat. The applicant relied on a narrower claim set combining Claims 1 and 2 of the patent as granted. The court addressed two key procedural issues: whether relying on a narrower claim set precludes preliminary measures, and whether auxiliary requests submitted for the first time in the reply brief should be admitted. The court ordered preliminary injunctive relief against the respondents in multiple UPC member states.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology, Inc., 5th Fl., 216 Hwangsaeul-ro Bundang-gu - 13595 - Seongnam-si, v.ASUSTeK Computer, Inc., ASUS Computer GmbH

UPC Court · UPC_8455D50421

This case concerned a patent infringement action filed by Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology against several ASUS entities and Ninepoint GmbH regarding EP 3 849 157, along with two counterclaims for revocation filed by ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. and ASUS Computer GmbH. Before the closure of the written procedure, all parties mutually agreed to withdraw the infringement action and both counterclaims for revocation without requesting a cost decision. The Local Division Mannheim permitted the withdrawals, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered a 50% proportional reimbursement of court fees to each party that had paid them.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 10, 2026

GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA,Rue de l’Institut 89, 1330 Ri v.the Netherlands, Pfizer Manufacturing Belgium N.V., Rijksweg 12, 2870 Puurs-S

The Hague Local Division · UPC_AA3AE0D351

This procedural order concerns three related actions before the Hague Local Division involving GSK as claimant and a group of Pfizer and BioNTech entities (collectively 'PBNT') as defendants, regarding two divisional patents EP856 and EP941. Both patents were revoked at the European Patent Office—EP941 by the opposition division on 24 June 2026 and EP856 by the Technical Board of Appeal on 20 July 2026—for lack of novelty. The court disposed of the counterclaim action concerning EP856 as devoid of purpose, ordered GSK to bear the costs, and postponed its decision on PBNT's request to stay the remaining proceedings pending the issuance of the written grounds of the TBA decision.

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 10, 2026

Jyothy Labs Ltd. v.Dabur India Ltd.

Bombay High Court · Commercial IP Suit No. 240 of 2021; Interim Application No. 1880 of 2021

Jyothy Labs Ltd. filed a commercial IP suit against Dabur India Ltd. for infringement and passing off of its registered trademarks containing the word 'NEEM' as the leading and essential feature, used in relation to toothpaste and dentifrices. The Plaintiff sought interim relief restraining the Defendant from using an impugned label mark that prominently featured 'NEEM'. The Bombay High Court allowed the Interim Application, holding that the Plaintiff had established a prima facie case of both infringement and passing off, and that the balance of convenience lay in its favour.

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 7, 2026

Bisleri International Private Limited v.Belaguli Mahalingegowda Kirankumar, proprietor of Kalabyraveshwara Mineral Water Industry

Bombay High Court · Commercial IP Suit (L.) No. 18582 of 2026; Interim Application (L) No. 18664 of 2026

Bisleri International Private Limited filed a commercial IP suit against Belaguli Mahalingegowda Kirankumar, proprietor of Kalabyraveshwara Mineral Water Industry, alleging that the Defendant was manufacturing and selling packaged drinking water under the deceptively similar mark 'Bislie'. The Plaintiff contended that the Defendant had merely deleted the letter 'r' and interchanged the positions of 'e' and 'i' from the Plaintiff's registered trademark 'Bisleri', along with copying the artistic work, colour scheme, and trade dress. Despite service, the Defendant failed to appear, and the Court allowed the Interim Application and Leave Petition, granting ad-interim relief including injunction and appointment of a Court Receiver.

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 7, 2026

Bisleri International Private Limited v.Belaguli Mahalingegowda Kirankumar (proprietor of Kalabyraveshwara Mineral Water Industry)

Bombay High Court · Commercial IP Suit (L.) No. 18582 of 2026; Interim Application (L) No. 18664 of 2026; Leave Petition No. 208 of 2026

Bisleri International Private Limited sued Belaguli Mahalingegowda Kirankumar, proprietor of Kalabyraveshwara Mineral Water Industry, for trademark infringement and copyright piracy arising from the defendant's use of the mark 'Bislie' on packaged drinking water. The Bombay High Court found a strong prima facie case that 'Bislie' was deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark 'Bisleri,' with the defendant having merely deleted the letter 'r' and rearranged 'e' and 'i.' The court granted ad-interim relief including injunctive relief and appointment of a Court Receiver to search and seize infringing goods.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 6, 2026

Niche Biomedical, Inc., (doing business as ANEUVO), 10940 Wi v.Respondent

Court of Appeal · UPC_ABE925FF56

This is a cost decision by the Local Chamber Munich of the Unified Patent Court concerning the assessment of recoverable costs following injunction proceedings (UPC_CFI_693/2025) involving EP 3 421 081 B1. The applicant (Niche Biomedical/ANEUVO) sought reimbursement of EUR 168,200.00, arguing the cost ceiling should be raised by 50% under Rule 152(2) RoP. The court held that no proper request to raise the ceiling had been made, as merely requesting reimbursement of costs exceeding the ceiling does not constitute an explicit request to raise it. The court set the recoverable costs at the applicable ceiling of EUR 112,000.00 and rejected the remainder of the request.

patent settled · Aug 6, 2026

AstraZeneca AB & Anr. v.MSN Laboratories Private Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 426/2020

This was a patent infringement suit filed by Astrazeneca AB and another plaintiff against MSN Laboratories Private Limited seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from infringing Indian Patent Nos. 205147 and 235625. During the pendency of the suit, the parties amicably settled their disputes and entered into a confidential Settlement Agreement. The court allowed the joint application, recorded the settlement, decreed the suit in terms of the settlement, and granted the plaintiffs a refund of the entire court fees.

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 6, 2026

Nouveau Medicament Private Limited v.Maxttox Healthcare Pvt Ltd & Anr. (VOX DEI Labs)

Madras High Court · OA Nos. 812 to 814 of 2026 in CS(COMM DIV) No. 234 of 2026

Nouveau Medicament Private Limited, the registered proprietor of the pharmaceutical trademark 'ARG 9' (Registration No. 2645507), filed three Original Applications seeking ad interim injunctions against Maxttox Healthcare Pvt Ltd. and VOX DEI Labs for allegedly using the deceptively similar mark 'UPRG9'. The Madras High Court, relying on its earlier order dated 07.01.2026 in OA Nos. 740 to 742 of 2025 where a similar alpha-numeric mark 'URG-9' was found prima facie infringing, granted the ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from using the impugned mark.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 5, 2026

Dolby International AB, Dublin, Ireland, Vectis IP Ltd., London, United Kingdom v.CPYou B.V., ´sHertogenbosch, The Netherlands, Acer Italy s.r.l., Arese, Italy

Hamburg Local Division · UPC_F201884E8B

This is an appeal before the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerning an application for suspensive effect under R. 223 RoP. Dolby and Vectis appealed an order from the Local Division The Hague that had admitted Vectis's intervention in infringement proceedings and declared a counterclaim for FRAND rate-setting against Vectis admissible. They requested a stay of the proceedings pending the appeal. The Court of Appeal rejected all requests for a stay, finding that the impugned order was not manifestly wrong, that neither R. 21.2 RoP nor R. 295(m) RoP justified a stay, and that no exceptional circumstances existed under Art. 74(1) UPCA and R. 223 RoP. The Court additionally held that Dolby's appeal was inadmissible because the JR order did not adversely affect Dolby.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 5, 2026

Dolby International AB, Dublin, Ireland, Vectis IP Ltd., London, United Kingdom v.CPYou B.V., ´sHertogenbosch, The Netherlands, Acer Italy s.r.l., Arese, Italy

Hamburg Local Division · UPC_8F1BA9DBD4

This is an order of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerning an application for suspensive effect under R. 223 RoP. Dolby International AB and Vectis IP Ltd. appealed an order of the Local Division The Hague that had admitted Vectis's intervention in infringement proceedings relating to European patent EP 3 079 153 and declared a counterclaim for FRAND rate-setting against Vectis admissible. The appellants sought a stay of the first-instance proceedings pending the appeal. The Court of Appeal rejected the requests for a stay, finding that the impugned order was not manifestly wrong, and additionally held that Dolby's appeal was inadmissible because the JR order did not adversely affect Dolby.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 5, 2026

QIAGEN Sciences, LLC,, its Treasurer and CFO Roland Sackers, its Senior Vice Presid v.bioMérieux S.A.,, bioMérieux Deutschland GmbH,

Düsseldorf Local Division · UPC_CFI_181/2025

This case concerned European patent EP 2 726 883 before the Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court. QIAGEN Sciences, LLC filed a patent infringement action against bioMérieux S.A. and bioMérieux Deutschland GmbH on 28 February 2025, and the defendants filed counterclaims for revocation on 10 June 2025. Prior to the closure of the written procedure, the parties reached an out-of-court settlement and jointly requested withdrawal of all claims. The Court allowed the withdrawal of both the infringement action and the counterclaims for revocation, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 50% of the unconsumed court fees to both sides.

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 5, 2026

Novartis AG & Anr. v.Biophore India Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd

Delhi High Court - Orders · CS(COMM) 223/2026

Novartis AG and another plaintiff filed a commercial suit (CS(COMM) 223/2026) against Biophore India Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd seeking a permanent injunction to restrain alleged infringement of Indian Patent No. 419280 (IN'280) relating to Asciminib. The Defendant filed an application seeking condonation of a 34-day delay in filing its written statement, which was allowed. The Defendant then voluntarily undertook not to commercially manufacture, sell, or deal in any product containing Asciminib or Asciminib Hydrochloride during the subsistence of IN'280, while reserving its rights under Section 107A of the Patents Act, 1970.

patent interim order · Aug 5, 2026

Natco Pharma Limited v.The Controller of Patents & Designs & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · W.P.(C)-IPD 33/2026

Natco Pharma Limited filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside an order dated 10.07.2026 passed by the Deputy Controller of Patents & Designs in Patent Application No. 1014/DELNP/2011. The private respondents challenged the maintainability of the petition, arguing that challenging the dismissal of a pre-grant opposition is contrary to Sections 25(2) and 64 of the Patents Act, 1970, which provide equally efficacious remedies. The court issued notice limited to the issue of maintainability and listed the matter for 16th September 2026.

patent interim order · Aug 5, 2026

Wipro Enterprises Private Limited v.The Deputy Registrar Trademarks, Office of Trademark Registry, Chennai

Madras High Court · WP(IPD) No. 27 of 2026

Wipro Enterprises Private Limited filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the Deputy Registrar of Trademarks to dispose of TM-P and TM-M applications filed in respect of four Assignment Deeds involving trademarks transferred from various parties to KKR Agro Mills Private Limited and subsequently to the Petitioner. The Madras High Court, without entering into the merits of the claim, directed the Respondent to take up and dispose of the applications on merits and in accordance with law within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 4, 2026

Paris v.Gilead Sciences, Inc., 333 Lakeside Drive, Foster City, CA 9, LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

Court of Appeal · UPC_A654C1AFDB

In this legal proceeding before Court of Appeal (decision issued on 2026-08-04) under reference UPC_A654C1AFDB, Paris appeared in dispute with Gilead Sciences, Inc., 333 Lakeside Drive, Foster City, CA 9, LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS concerning patent rights and legal remedies.

1 •••3 4 5•••411

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →