Litigation
8 litigation decisions from The Hague Local Division.
Litigation Decisions
8 cases | Page 1 of 1
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.C.P. Pharmaceuticals International C.V. et al.
This is a procedural order (R.105.5) issued by the judge-rapporteur of the Unified Patent Court, The Hague Local Division, in a patent infringement action brought by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA against multiple Pfizer and BioNTech entities (collectively 'PBNT') concerning European Patent EP2590626. The order, issued following an interim conference, addresses procedural matters to streamline and prepare the case for the oral hearing scheduled for 1 September 2026, including decisions on the value of the case, the admission of late-filed exhibits, expert cross-examination, conditional counterclaims for revocation, and the allocation of pleading times.
Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. & Others v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL)
This appeal concerns a confidentiality regime ordered by the Hague Local Division in FRAND-related patent infringement proceedings brought by Ericsson against Shenzhen Transsion and others regarding three European patents in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. The Court of Appeal considered whether the Court of First Instance had the power to grant leave to appeal after the 15-day time limit under Rule 220.2/220.3 RoP had expired. The Court held that the CFI's late grant of leave to appeal did not alter the deemed refusal, but invited the parties to comment on whether the original request could be treated as including a request for discretionary review under Rule 220.3 RoP.
Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. and Others v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL)
This is an order from the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerning appeals filed by Shenzhen Transsion entities against an order of The Hague Local Division granting Ericsson's confidentiality application in FRAND-related patent infringement proceedings involving three European patents in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. The Court of Appeal considered whether the Court of First Instance had the power to grant leave to appeal after the 15-day time limit under R. 220.2/220.3 RoP had expired. The Court held that the CFI's later grant of leave did not alter the fact that leave was deemed refused due to the expiry of the time limit, and invited parties to comment on whether the original request could be treated as a request for discretionary review under R. 220.3 RoP.
Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson
This is an order from the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerning appeals filed by Shenzhen Transsion and related entities against a confidentiality order issued by the Hague Local Division in infringement proceedings brought by Ericsson relating to three European patents in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology under a FRAND licence framework. The Court of Appeal considered whether the Court of First Instance had the power to grant leave to appeal after the 15-day time limit under R. 220.3 RoP had expired. The Court held that the CFI no longer had such power once the time limit expired, but noted that the appellants' request might be treated as including a request for discretionary review, and invited the parties to comment on this point.
Xingi Technology CO., Ltd. and Jiangsu Jiuzhou Xingji High-Performance Fiber Products Co., Ltd. v.Avient Protective Materials B.V.
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court partially granted an application for suspensive effect filed by Xingi Technology and Jiangsu Jiuzhou Xingji against an order of The Hague Local Division requiring them to produce UD fabric samples and a company introduction video under Rule 190 RoP. The appellants argued that compliance within the two-week deadline was impossible due to Chinese military-grade export control regulations requiring 1-2 months to obtain permits. The Court extended the compliance deadline to 15 July 2026 while rejecting the appellants' other arguments regarding procedural violations and manifest errors.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. and others
This order concerns three appeal proceedings before the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court, in which the appellants (Shenzhen Transsion and related entities) sought to withdraw their appeals against a confidentiality order issued by the Hague Local Division in underlying infringement proceedings brought by Ericsson concerning three European patents related to 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. Following a settlement between the parties, Shenzhen Transsion applied to withdraw the appeals and sought reimbursement of 50% of the court fees, with Ericsson's consent.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. and others
This case concerns an appeal before the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court regarding a confidentiality order issued by The Hague Local Division in underlying infringement proceedings involving three European patents related to 4G LTE and 5G NR technology in the context of a FRAND licence dispute. After the parties reached a settlement providing for termination of the appeal proceedings by withdrawal of the underlying CFI proceedings, Shenzhen Transsion applied to withdraw the appeals with Ericsson's consent. The Court of Appeal permitted the withdrawal, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 50% of the appeal court fees (EUR 2,000) to Shenzhen Transsion.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL) v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. and others
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.
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.