Granted
at Hamburg (DE) Local Division
16 granted decisions from Hamburg (DE) Local Division.
Granted Decisions
16 cases | Page 1 of 1
BTL Medizintechnik GmbH v.Lexter Microelectronic Engineering Systems S.L.
This procedural order addressed a request for reimbursement of court fees following the withdrawal of an infringement action in the UPC. The Court confirmed that because the case was terminated before the conclusion of the written procedure, the Claimant was entitled to 60% of their paid court fees under Rule 370.9 RoP. This decision highlights the practical application of cost recovery rules when litigation is voluntarily withdrawn.
Brita SE v.Fileder Filter Systems Spółka z o.o.
Brita SE successfully obtained an interim injunction from the UPC Local Chamber against Fileder Filter Systems Spółka z o.o. regarding the alleged infringement of EP 2 131 940 B1. The patent covers a specific water treatment device featuring a cartridge with a rotatable locking shaft for securing the connection head. The court ordered an immediate cessation of offering and placing on the market of the infringing cartridges across multiple EU member states. This decision highlights the UPC's efficiency in granting urgent provisional measures to protect IP rights.
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. v.HMD Global Oy
This UPC decision addressed a procedural application regarding the language of proceedings in an infringement case involving HMD Global Oy and Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft. The Court ruled in favor of HMD Global, granting its request to change the court language from German to English (the patent grant language). The ruling underscores the importance of considering the defendant's operational needs and ability to coordinate internally when balancing fairness under Article 49(5) UPCA.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Renault Nederland N.V.
This UPC decision addressed a procedural application seeking to change the language of proceedings from German to English, aligning with the patent's grant language. The Claimant did not object, and the Court granted the request based on fairness considerations, noting that the parties are internationally active and the technical field uses English predominantly. This ruling reinforces the flexibility of the UPC in managing procedural logistics while ensuring fair access to justice for all involved.
Ballinno B.V. v.Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA)
This UPC decision addresses the release of a security deposit provided by the applicant in a cost dispute. The Court ruled that when parties reach an inter partes settlement regarding legal costs, the security can be transferred to the beneficiary to finalize the matter. This ruling clarifies the practical application of procedural rules concerning financial guarantees and settlements within the UPC framework.
Steros GPA Innovative S.L. v.OTEC Präzisionsfinish GmbH
Steros GPA Innovative S.L. successfully obtained a provisional injunction against OTEC Präzisionsfinish GmbH regarding the use of its electrolytic medium in electropolishing processes (EP 4 249 647 B1). The Hamburg Local Division upheld the cease and desist order, imposing significant recurring penalty payments for non-compliance. This case highlights the practical application of provisional measures within the UPC framework, emphasizing the balance between protecting patent rights and considering market interests.
Visibly Inc. v.Easee B.V.
In this procedural order, the UPC granted Visibly Inc.'s request for security for costs against Easee B.V. The court found that despite arguments regarding the UPCA's scope and the defendants' status as a start-up, the claimant was entitled to protect itself from non-recovery of legal fees due to the defendants' precarious financial situation. This decision reinforces the procedural right of parties in UPC proceedings to seek security for costs when there is a genuine risk that judgment costs cannot be recovered.
Malikie Innovations Ltd. v.Nintendo of Europe SE, Nintendo Co., Ltd.
This UPC decision addressed a motion concerning the confidentiality of sensitive sales and profit data submitted by Nintendo. The Court ruled on balancing the fundamental right to be heard against the protection of trade secrets, ultimately upholding the general principle of confidentiality while granting limited access to specific Claimant personnel. This case reinforces the strict obligations parties have regarding handling confidential information, especially when it originates from third-party sources.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH
This decision addresses the procedural competence regarding the withdrawal of a cost determination application in an ongoing UPC case. Although the main infringement and revocation proceedings have moved to the Appeal Court, the specific procedure for determining costs remains under the jurisdiction of the court of first instance's Rapporteur. The court confirmed its original authority to grant the request to withdraw the cost claim, thereby closing that phase of the litigation.
Malikie Innovations Ltd. v.Nintendo of Europe SE
This preliminary order addressed a procedural issue in an infringement action brought by Malikie Innovations Ltd. against Nintendo of Europe SE regarding patent EP2579551. The Claimant sought to correct the name of Defendant 1 from 'Nintendo of Europe AG' to 'Nintendo of Europe SE', as the latter succeeded the former. The Court granted this rectification, confirming that no unreasonable prejudice was caused because the successor company had taken over all assets and business premises.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Vizgen, Inc.
In a procedural ruling concerning confidentiality, the UPC Court addressed the protection of sensitive business information shared between 10x Genomics and Vizgen. The court confirmed that specific documents contained highly confidential trade secrets related to their licensing agreement. It issued an order strictly limiting access to these materials only to the respective outside legal counsel, reinforcing the protective measures established in parallel US litigation.
10x Genomics, Inc. v.Vizgen, Inc.
In a procedural ruling concerning trade secrets, the UPC granted an order to protect confidential information contained within a licensing agreement (BP 34). The court recognized that the document held commercially valuable business and operational secrets. Consequently, access was strictly limited to the parties' legal counsel ('Outside Attorneys’ Eyes Only'), reinforcing existing protections from parallel US litigation.
Ballinno B.V. v.Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA), Kinexon GmbH, Kinexon Sports & Media GmbH
This UPC decision addressed a request by the public (Powell Gilbert LLP) seeking access to documents filed in an earlier application for provisional measures. The Court balanced the principle of public scrutiny against the protection of trade secrets. While granting general access to pleadings, the Court strictly enforced confidentiality rules, requiring redaction of highly sensitive technical data belonging to the Defendants.
Roche Diabetes Care GmbH v.Tandem Diabetes Care Inc.
This UPC decision addressed a procedural application to change the language of proceedings from German to English for an infringement case involving drug infusion systems. The Court ruled that despite one defendant being based in Germany, the interests and positions of the defendants collectively justified switching the language to English, which was the patent's granting language. This ruling reinforces the principle that when balancing linguistic interests, the position of the defendants holds decisive weight.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH; Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE
In a case concerning patent infringement, the UPC Local Division issued a final order regarding confidentiality of business information. The court determined that projected sales results submitted by Tesla were indeed trade secrets, necessitating strict access limitations. This ruling is significant for practitioners as it reinforces the robust protection available for commercially sensitive data within ongoing UPC litigation.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH; Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE
In a case concerning patent infringement, the UPC Local Division issued a final order regarding confidentiality. The court ruled that certain documents containing projected sales results constituted protected trade secrets under EU law. This ruling significantly restricts who can access these sensitive business forecasts during the ongoing litigation, emphasizing the protection of commercial interests within the UPC framework.
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.