Litigation
8 litigation decisions from The Hague - Local Division.
Litigation Decisions
8 cases | Page 1 of 1
1) Genevant Sciences GmbH, 2) Arbutus Biopharma Corpora7on v.1) Moderna, Inc., 2) MODERNATX, INC.
This case concerned infringement proceedings (UPC-CFI-191/2025) and a counterclaim for revocation (UPC-CFI-617/2025) brought by Genevant Sciences GmbH and Arbutus Biopharma Corporation against multiple Moderna entities regarding European Patent EP2279254. The parties reached a settlement and jointly requested withdrawal of their respective claims and closure of the proceedings. The court allowed the withdrawal, declared both proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 25% of the court fees, reduced from the standard 50% due to the exceptional circumstances of the case.
1) Genevant Sciences GmbH, 2) Arbutus Biopharma Corpora7on v.1) Moderna, Inc., 2) MODERNATX, INC.
This case before the UPC Court of First Instance (The Hague Local Division) concerned infringement proceedings (UPC-CFI-192/2025) brought by Genevant Sciences GmbH and Arbutus Biopharma Corporation against Moderna and related entities regarding EP4241767, along with a counterclaim for revocation (UPC-CFI-607/2025). Both parties jointly requested withdrawal of their respective claims pursuant to Rule 265.1 RoP, having reached a settlement. The court allowed the withdrawal, declared both proceedin
Maxell, Ltd. v.Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.
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.
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.Moderna Netherlands B.V., Moderna Biotech Distributor UK Ltd
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.
1) Koninklijke KPN N.V. v.1) Oleading B.V., 518100 Shenzhen, Guangdong Province
This order from the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (The Hague Local Division) addressed a dispute regarding the expansion of a confidentiality club in an infringement action concerning EP2337403 and EP3944587. Oppo requested that its counsel be permitted to grant access to certain license materials to additional persons, while KPN objected to expanding the club from five to seven natural persons. The Judge-Rapporteur declined to expand the confidentiality club, finding no substantiated reason to diverge from the parallel Düsseldorf proceedings' regime, and granted limited access to two named individuals under the existing confidentiality regime.
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL), Versaevel and others (Winston v.Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd.,, Universal Industrial Centre,
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.
Maxell, Ltd. v.Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 129 Samsung-Ro, Maetan-3dong, Yeong-tong-
This is a procedural order from the Local Division Munich of the Unified Patent Court in consolidated proceedings (CFI_196/2025 and CFI_665/2025) concerning European patent EP 2 403 266. The order summarizes the interim conference held on 30 April 2026, addressing case management matters including the value of proceedings, exhibit submissions, confidentiality, limitation of invalidity attacks and auxiliary requests, and scheduling of the oral hearing for 23 July 2026.
1) BTL Medizintechnik GmbH v.1) Lexter Microelectronic Engineering Systems S.L., c/ Larrano 7, San Lorenzo de El Escorial
The Local Division The Hague of the Unified Patent Court issued an order regarding a reimbursement request filed by the Claimant after the closure of infringement proceedings. The court declared the request for reimbursement of 60% of court fees inadmissible, finding that the case had been closed, no request for reopening had been filed, the claimant had forfeited its right by stating no cost decision was needed, and the application was filed almost two months after closure. Leave to appeal was
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.