Litigation
at Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division
282 litigation decisions from Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division.
Litigation Decisions
282 cases | Page 9 of 10
Dolby International AB v.HP Deutschland GmbH & Others
Dolby International AB filed a patent infringement action against 15 HP entities regarding European Patent EP 3 490 258 B1, which relates to video decoding devices for HEVC files. Following the defendants' request to summon NVIDIA Corporation as a third party, the plaintiff sought leave to limit its claims to exclude devices where the claimed video decoding means are implemented by graphics cards sold by NVIDIA or its affiliated companies. The Local Chamber Düsseldorf allowed the limitation as an unconditional restriction under R. 263.3 RoP, finding it was not merely a clarification but a permissible narrowing of the claim.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
10x Genomics, Inc. sought provisional measures against Curio Bioscience Inc. before the Local Chamber Düsseldorf of the Unified Patent Court, alleging infringement of European Patent EP 2 697 391 B1 concerning methods and arrays for localized detection of nucleic acid in tissue samples. The court found that 10x Genomics had standing as the registered patent proprietor and that Curio Bioscience's product fell within the scope of patent claim 14. The court granted a partial injunction limited to the specific embodiment of claim 14, ordered mutual provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 100,000, and required 10x Genomics to post security of EUR 2,000,000 before enforcement.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
10x Genomics, Inc. sought provisional measures against Curio Bioscience Inc. before the Local Division in Düsseldorf for alleged infringement of European Patent EP 2 697 391 B1, which protects methods and products for localised detection of nucleic acid in tissue samples. The court granted a partial injunction restraining Curio Bioscience from offering, marketing, using, or possessing certain arrays with poly-T capture probes in Germany, France, and Sweden, subject to 10x Genomics providing security of EUR 2,000,000. Both parties were ordered to provisionally reimburse each other's costs in the amount of EUR 100,000 each, reflecting their partial success.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Procedural order from the Local Chamber Düsseldorf concerning European Patent EP 2 697 391 B1. The claimant, 10x Genomics, Inc., filed an infringement action against Curio Bioscience Inc. in German, but both parties subsequently agreed to switch the procedural language to English, the language in which the patent was granted. The court approved the joint request and ordered the proceedings to continue in English.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
This is a procedural order from the Local Division Düsseldorf concerning EP 2 697 391 B1 in the context of an application for provisional measures. The court addressed the language of proceedings after the Court of Appeal changed the language from German to English just two weeks before the final order was due. The judge-rapporteur ordered that the final order may be issued in German with a certified English translation to avoid unnecessary delay.
Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. v.expert e-Commerce GmbH, expert klein GmbH
This is a procedural order from the Local Chamber Düsseldorf concerning an application for intervention (Streithilfe) by Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., the parent company and simple licensee of the plaintiff Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd., in proceedings involving European Patent EP 3 926 698 B1. The court held that the intervention application was admissible, finding that a simple licensee has a legal interest in intervening on the plaintiff's side to prevent the patent from being retroactively revoked via a nullity counterclaim, and that when a Local Chamber decides to hear the infringement action and nullity counterclaim together, the licensee may intervene in the entire proceedings.
F. Hoffman-La Roche AG and Roche Diabetes Care GmbH v.Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care Europe B.V., VitalAire GmbH, Dinno Santé s.a.i., Air Liquide Healthcare Nederland B.V., and Rubin Medical ApS
This is a procedural language dispute before the Local Chamber Düsseldorf of the Unified Patent Court concerning European Patent EP 1 970 677 B1. The plaintiffs (Roche entities) chose German as the procedural language, and multiple defendants objected, seeking a change to English. The court rejected all objections, holding that the plaintiffs' choice of German was valid under Art. 49(2) UPCA and Rule 14.2 RoP, and that the defendants' objections were either unfounded or, in the case of defendants 3-5, also filed out of time.
F. Hoffman-La Roche AG and Roche Diabetes Care GmbH v.Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care Europe B.V., VitalAire GmbH, Dinno Santé s.a.i., Air Liquide Healthcare Nederland B.V., and Rubin Medical ApS
This procedural order from the Local Chamber Düsseldorf concerned objections filed by several defendants seeking to change the language of proceedings from German to English in a patent infringement action concerning EP 1 970 677 B1. The court rejected all objections, holding that the plaintiffs' choice of German as the procedural language was valid under Article 49(2) EPGÜ and Rule 14.2(a) RoP, and that the exceptions in Rule 14.2(b) did not apply since Germany does not designate any official language other than German. The court further held that the objection by Defendants 3, 4, and 5 was time-barred because their submissions were not received by the Sub-Registry within the extended deadline.
Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH v.Mammut Sports Group AG and Mammut Sports Group GmbH
Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH, the proprietor of European Patent EP 3 466 498 B1 concerning an avalanche victim search device (LVS), sought provisional measures against Mammut Sports Group regarding the 'Barryvox S2' device. The Local Chamber Düsseldorf maintained the preliminary injunction of December 11, 2023, ordered the respondents to provisionally reimburse costs of EUR 33,375.70, and rejected the respondents' counter-application for provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 19,858.40.
FUJIFILM Corporation v.Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, and Kodak Holding GmbH
This procedural order from the Düsseldorf Local Division concerns a request by FUJIFILM Corporation to extend the time period for filing its reply to the defendants' Statement of defence, Counterclaims for revocation, and application to amend European Patent EP 3 594 009 B1. The defendants had filed confidential information related to alleged private prior use and business figures, and access was initially restricted to the claimant's representatives. The court granted the extension until 28 May 2024, finding that the delayed and restricted access to confidential information constituted an exceptional case justifying the extension.
FUJIFILM Corporation v.Kodak GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bisscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
Curio Bioscience Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
Curio Bioscience Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
Curio Bioscience Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
Curio Bioscience Inc. v.10x Genomics, Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
FUJIFILM Corporation v.Kodak GmbH a. o.
Unified Patent Court decision.
FUJIFILM Corporation v.Kodak GmbH a. o.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Curio Bioscience Inc.
Unified Patent Court decision.
Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH v.Mammut Sports Group AG, Mammut Sports Group GmbH
Unified Patent Court decision.
Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH v.Mammut Sports Group AG, Mammut Sports Group GmbH
Unified Patent Court decision.
Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. v.expert e-Commerce GmbH, expert klein GmbH
Unified Patent Court decision.
Dolby International AB v.HP Deutschland GmbH, HP Inc., HP International SARL, HP Austria GmbH, HP France SAS, HP Belgium SPRL, HP Inc Danmark ApS, HP Finlan Oy, HP Italy S.r.l, Hewlett-Packard Nederland BV, HP PPS Sverige AB, HPCP - Computing and Printi
Unified Patent Court decision.
Aarke AB v.SodaStream Industries Ltd.
Unified Patent Court decision.
N.V. Nutricia v.Nestlé Health Science (Deutschland) GmbH
Unified Patent Court decision.
Facing a similar IP matter?
Arctic Invent is a specialist IP firm with deep litigation expertise across India, EU, US, and UK. Our team uses data-driven strategy to build stronger cases.