Patent Cases

12,714 decisions across India · European UPC · US PTAB

India 4,909 European UPC 2,185 US PTAB 5,620

Page 85 of 424

patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 21, 2025

Cipla Limited v.Union Of India Through Department Of Promotion Of Industry And Internal Trade & Anr

Delhi High Court - Orders · 19552251

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Cipla Limited, directing the Trademark Registry to allow the renewal of its 'TRIEXER' trademark. The core finding was that the Registry failed to serve the mandatory statutory 'O3 notice' required under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. Despite the trademark having lapsed and the petitioner failing to file timely renewals, the court emphasized this procedural lapse by the Respondent, granting Cipla a chance to regularize its mark.
patent · Aug 20, 2025

expert klein GmbH, expert e-Commerce GmbH v.Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.

Luxembourg (LU) · UPC-000432

This is an order from the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerning an application for leave to appeal against a cost decision of the Local Division Düsseldorf and a proposed preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 TFEU. The underlying dispute involved Seoul Viosys's infringement action against the expert companies concerning European Patent EP 3 223 320, which the Local Division had revoked following a counterclaim for invalidity and ordered Viosys to pay the costs. The Court of Appeal addressed fundamental questions about the scope of the UPC's ability to refer matters to the CJEU, holding that while the UPC may request interpretation of EU law, it cannot request interpretation of the UPCA itself or its Rules of Procedure.
patent · Aug 20, 2025

Lepu Medical (Europa) Cooperatief U.A., Lepu Medcial Technology (Peking) Co., Ltd. v.Occlutech GmbH

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000431

This procedural order was issued by the Local Chamber Düsseldorf in case UPC_CFI_630/2025 concerning European Patent EP 1 998 686 B1. The applicant Occlutech GmbH sought interim measures against Lepu Medical (Europa) Cooperatief U.A. and Lepu Medical Technology (Peking) Co., Ltd., who challenged both infringement and validity of the patent-in-suit. The court ordered the addition of a technically qualified judge to the panel to ensure proper assessment of the patent's validity at the interim measures stage.
patent · Aug 20, 2025

Centripetal Limited v.Respondent

Mannheim (DE) Local Division · UPC-000430

The Local Division Mannheim issued a procedural order confirming the judge-rapporteur's earlier decision to reject the Claimant's request to submit a further written pleading on infringement. The Claimant, Centripetal Limited, sought to introduce a new infringement reading based on an alleged newly discovered functionality of the attacked embodiment, but the panel held that allowing such a submission at this late stage would prejudice the Defendants and disrupt the scheduled oral hearing. The panel further barred the Claimant from introducing a fifth infringement reading, noting that the relevant functionalities had been known to the Claimant since 2023 ITC proceedings and since the March 2025 launch of the Defendants' AI Stack.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 20, 2025

MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01384

MWE Investments and Champion Power Equipment settled their IPR over U.S. Patent 11,905,895 and jointly requested that the settlement be kept confidential under 35 U.S.C. §317(b). The petition seeks withdrawal from the proceeding and confidentiality for the agreement.
patent · Aug 20, 2025

MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01384

MWE Investments, Harbor Freight Tools, and Generac, together with Champion Power Equipment, filed a joint request asking the PTAB to keep the settlement agreement (Exhibit 1300) confidential and separate from the IPR file. The request cites statutory confidentiality provisions.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 20, 2025

MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01384

The PTAB granted settlement motions, terminating the IPRs against Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. and MWE Investments, LLC, while keeping the settlement agreements confidential. Generac Power Systems remains as the sole petitioner in the related IPRs.
patent · Aug 20, 2025

MWE Investments, LLC et al. v.Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

· IPR2025-01384

Petitioners seek IPR cancellation of all 21 claims of Champion’s dual‑fuel lockout switch patent, arguing obviousness over DuroMax, Elsdon, Parlatore, Hallberg and a lack of structural support for key claim terms.
patent denied · Aug 20, 2025

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. v.Marlin Semiconductor Ltd. et al.

· IPR2025-01054

The PTAB denied institution of an IPR challenge brought by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd. against Marlin Semiconductor Ltd., finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on the merits.
patent pending · Aug 20, 2025

Officine Maccaferri S. P. A. v.Techfab India Industries Limited

Delhi High Court - Orders · 7861270

The plaintiffs filed an application seeking an injunction and account of profits against the defendant alleging patent infringement. The court also addressed applications regarding exemption from pre-institution mediation and condonation of delay in filing replies.
patent interim order · Aug 20, 2025

Bisleri International Private Limited v.Bisheshwar Mahto

Bombay High Court · 115088500

The petitioner, Bisleri International Private Limited, sought interim relief against the respondent for infringing its trademarks and copyrights concerning packaged drinking water. The court granted ad-interim injunctions restraining the defendant from using deceptively similar marks and artwork, and also allowed leave to combine the passing off claim with the infringement suit.
patent pending · Aug 20, 2025

Bisleri International Private Limited v.Priti Rajawat, Sole Proprietor Of M/S ...

Bombay High Court · 19716379

Bisleri International Private Limited filed an Interim Application seeking further ad-interim relief against Priti Rajawat for alleged infringement of its trademarks (BRISLERI), copyright in its label/packaging, and design/shape. The court noted that previous interim orders were granted but had not been served on the Defendants. Consequently, the court ordered service of the relevant order before hearing and disposing of the current application.
patent interim order · Aug 20, 2025

Bisleri International Private Limited v.Bisheshwar Mahto

Bombay High Court · 33700321

The plaintiff, Bisleri International Private Limited, filed an interim application seeking injunctions against the defendant for infringing its trade marks (BISLERI) and copyrights. The court granted ad-interim relief restraining the defendant from using similar marks, artwork, and designs on packaged drinking water products.
patent mixed · Aug 20, 2025

Dabur India Limited v.Marico Limited & Anr.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 147314886

The Delhi High Court permitted Dabur India Limited to amend its trademark cancellation petition against Marico Limited. The amendment corrected an inadvertent error where the petitioner had mistakenly stated that their mark was 'deceptively similar' to the respondent's mark, contrary to their actual legal stand. The court allowed the correction, emphasizing that the change did not alter the cause of action or prejudice the respondent, thereby upholding the principle of rectifying clerical errors in pleadings.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

Adeia Guides Inc. v.Respondent

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000436

This procedural order concerns a deadline extension request in an infringement action involving European Patent EP1969839. The claimant, Adeia Guides Inc., filed exhibits 8 and 9 late on 5 August 2025, and sought a corresponding extension of deadlines. The defendants, comprising three Walt Disney entities, indicated they did not object provided their own subsequent deadlines were not shortened. The court granted the extension, determining that the relevant deadlines for the claimant's rejoinder and reply would begin on 5 August 2025.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

ASUS Computer GmbH, ASUSTeK Italy S.r.l., ASUS France S.a.r.l., ASUS Europe B.V., Ninepoint GmbH v.Respondent

Mannheim (DE) Local Division · UPC-000435

This procedural order concerned a request by Defendants 2 to 6 (ASUS-related entities and Ninepoint GmbH) to extend the time period for submitting their statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation in a patent infringement action concerning European patent EP 3 849 157. The defendants argued that the time period should run from when they obtained access to the unredacted version of exhibit BB1, which contained an agreement between the Claimant and the patent's co-owner. The court granted a one-week extension, extending the deadline to 30 September 2025, finding that the extension was sufficient to compensate for the delayed access to evidence.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

OrthoApnea S.L., Vivisol B BV v.Respondent

Brussels (BE) Local Division · UPC-000434

This is a definitive rectification order issued by the Local Division Brussels concerning a request under Rule 353 RoP to correct a costs decision (ORD_33711/2025 - ORD_8991/2024) issued on 25 July 2025. The plaintiffs, OrthoApnea S.L. and VIVISOL B BV, sought correction of a material error in the costs decision, specifically that expert VASQUEZ's costs of €2,200 were not included in the total reimbursement amount of €43,865.64 owed by the defendant. The court addressed the scope of rectification orders, clarifying that they cannot revisit the reasoning of the original decision and have no expanding or limiting effect on it.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

Solvay Specialty Polymers Italy S.p.A. v.Zhejiang Fluorine Chemical New Material Co., Ltd., Shanghai Youcheng International Trade Co., Ltd., Hubei Fluorine New Materials Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Benia New Material Technolo-gy Co., Ltd.

Munich (DE) Local Division · UPC-000433

Solvay Specialty Polymers Italy S.p.A. filed an infringement action concerning European Patent EP 2 147 029 against four Chinese defendants before the Local Division Munich. The court ordered the separation of proceedings because service had been effected on two defendants but not yet on the other two, creating mismatched procedural timelines. The action against the two served defendants was ordered to proceed separately, while both proceedings would remain before the same panel.
patent denied · Aug 19, 2025

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC

· IPR2025-01334

Google’s petition to invalidate Dialect’s speech‑interface patent was denied. The Board concluded the petitioner did not show a reasonable likelihood of success on any of the asserted obviousness grounds.
patent terminated or settled · Aug 19, 2025

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC

· IPR2025-01334

Meta Platforms and Dialect have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 7,398,209. The parties filed a joint motion to stay all deadlines while they finalize the settlement and prepare dismissal filings.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

Voltage, LLC et al. v.Shoals Technologies Group, LLC et al.

· IPR2025-01443

Voltage, LLC has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Shoals Technologies’ U.S. Patent 12,015,375 covering photovoltaic lead assemblies. The petition alleges obviousness over Machida and combinations with Solon and Kim, and asks the Board to adopt ITC claim constructions.
patent · Aug 19, 2025

Meta Platforms, Inc. v.Dialect, LLC

· IPR2025-01334

Meta Platforms petitions the PTAB to invalidate claims 1,4,6‑9 of U.S. Patent 7,398,209, alleging obviousness over multiple speech‑recognition and natural‑language prior arts. The petition lists five grounds invoking 35 U.S.C. § 103.
patent interim order · Aug 19, 2025

Caterpillar Inc. v.Zhejiang Santian Oil Filter Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 62827846

Caterpillar Inc. filed a suit against Zhejiang Santian Oil Filter Co. Ltd. alleging infringement of its patented and designed fluid filter systems used in construction and mining machinery. The Delhi High Court granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction to restrain the Defendants from infringing these rights. Furthermore, the court permitted the appointment of Local Commissioners to inspect premises, seize infringing goods, and take samples for analysis.
patent pending · Aug 19, 2025

Communication Components Antenna Inc v.Ace Technologies Corp. And Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 31264189

The defendants filed an application seeking the appointment of a scientific expert to determine their alleged infringement of the suit patent. The plaintiff objected, stating that the application was filed after evidence had concluded and the matter was nearing final arguments.
patent defendant favorable · Aug 19, 2025

Rajkumar Sabu v.Sabu Trade Private Ltd.

Madras High Court · 102644948

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Rajkumar Sabu challenging the acceptance and subsequent advertisement of the trademark 'SACHAMOTI' in favor of Sabu Trade Private Ltd. The petitioner sought to quash the acceptance report, arguing that the application was based on fabricated documents and should not proceed without hearing him. However, the Court found that the petitioner's interlocutory petition lacked statutory basis and noted that he already had a remedy available through lodging an opposition under the Trademark Act.
patent plaintiff favorable · Aug 19, 2025

Bikaner Sweets Corner v.Balaji Corner & Ors.

Delhi High Court - Orders · 84607438

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Bikaner Sweets Corner against Balaji Corner & Ors. The court found that the Defendants' adoption of the identical mark 'BIKANER SWEET CORNER' constituted potential infringement and passing off, given the proximity of the outlets and similarity of goods. Furthermore, the Defendants were immediately directed to cease using the impugned signboards and packaging within one week.
patent · Aug 18, 2025

Moderna Sweden AB, Moderna Poland SP. Z.O.O., Moderna France SASU, Moderna Belgium S.R.L., Moderna Biotech UK Limited, Moderna Germany GmbH, ModernaTX, Inc., Moderna Denmark ApS, Moderna Netherlands B.V., Moderna Norway AS, Moderna Biotech Spain SL, v.Respondent

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000438

1 The Hague - Local Division UPC_CFI_191/2025 UPC_CFI_192/2025 Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 18/08/2025 Concerning: R.333 review of an order regarding a preliminary objection R. 19 RoP APPLICANTS / DEFENDANTS IN THE MAIN
patent · Aug 18, 2025

Realme Chongqing Mobile Telecommunications Corp., Ltd, OROPE Germany GmbH, Reflection Investment B.V., Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd., Oleading B.V., OTECH Italia S.r.l., OTECH Germany GmbH, Realme Germany GmbH, OnePlus Technolog v.Respondent

Munich (DE) Local Division · UPC-000437

This order concerns an application by the defendants (a group of OPPO, OnePlus, Realme, and related entities) to change the language of proceedings from German to English in an infringement action brought by Innovative Sonic Corporation based on European Patent EP2765731. The defendants argued that English, being the language in which the patent was granted, should be used as the language of proceedings for reasons of fairness. The claimant opposed the application, requesting its dismissal or, alternatively, that the preferences of the first-instance panel be considered, or that oral proceedings be conducted in German even if the written language were changed.
patent · Aug 15, 2025

AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. v.Respondent

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000444

This is a procedural order in a patent infringement action concerning European Patent No. EP3286270, owned by AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. The claimant filed suit against Troy Chemical Company B.V., Troy Chemie GmbH, and several Azelis group entities. The parties jointly requested a stay of the proceedings until 13 February 2026, which was granted by the judge-rapporteur pursuant to Rule 295(d) of the Rules of Procedure.
patent · Aug 15, 2025

Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA), Kinexon GmbH, Kinexon Sports & Media GmbH v.Respondent

Luxembourg (LU) · UPC-000443

This case concerns an application for the release of security for procedural costs in appeal proceedings before the Court of Appeal. Ballinno B.V. had been ordered on 26 August 2024 to provide €25,000 in security for the legal costs of the Kinexon companies and UEFA, which it duly provided. Following the adjudication of the appeal on 26 June 2025 and the parties' subsequent settlement agreement, Kinexon requested release of the security with the consent of Ballinno and UEFA. The Court of Appeal ordered the full release and transfer of the €25,000 deposit to Kinexon Sports GmbH's bank account.
1 •••848586•••424
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 →