Litigation
at The Hague (NL) Local Division
82 litigation decisions from The Hague (NL) Local Division.
Litigation Decisions
82 cases | Page 1 of 3
Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc. v.Koninklijke Philips N.V. et al.
Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc. (ABM), proprietor of European Patent EP 2 437 696 B2 relating to wearable position therapy devices for treating sleep disorders, sued Koninklijke Philips N.V. and related entities for infringement of the patent with their NightBalance device. Philips counterclaimed for revocation, alleging lack of novelty, lack of inventive step, added matter, and insufficiency of disclosure. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) revoked the patent in its entirety as obvious over prior art JP H03-49748 A in combination with common general knowledge, dismissed the infringement action, and ordered ABM to pay costs.
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.Moderna et al.
This procedural order from the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) addresses three applications in patent infringement proceedings concerning EP4066856 and EP4226941. The court granted GSK's application under R.263 RoP to amend its claim to include Moderna's new product mNEXSPIKE, dismissed Moderna's R.9 application seeking to strike out late-filed submissions and evidence from GSK's Reply, and ordered GSK to provide a tabular overview of its 51 conditional auxiliary requests while rejecting Moderna's request to limit them to ten or dismiss them en bloc.
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.C.P. Pharmaceuticals International C.V. et al.
This is a procedural order from the Unified Patent Court concerning patent EP2590626 held by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA. The defendants (Pfizer and BioNTech entities, collectively 'PBNT') requested the court to limit GSK's auxiliary requests to ten and to extend the deadline for filing their rejoinder. The court dismissed the request to limit auxiliary requests but ordered GSK to provide a tabular overview of its auxiliary requests, and granted a one-week extension for PBNT's rejoinder submissions.
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.Moderna et al
A procedural order of the Court of First Instance addressing three applications in a patent infringement action concerning EP2590626. The court granted GSK's R.263 application to amend its claim to include Moderna's new product mNEXSPIKE, dismissed Moderna's R.9 application to strike out GSK's allegedly late-filed submissions and evidence, and ordered GSK to submit a tabular overview of its 40 auxiliary requests while rejecting Moderna's request to limit the number of ARs to ten or dismiss them en bloc.
Adeia Guides Inc. v.The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V. et al.
This case before the Local Division The Hague concerned an infringement claim by Adeia Guides Inc. against The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V., Disney Interactive Studios, Inc., and The Walt Disney Company Limited regarding European Patent EP1969839, along with a counterclaim for revocation. The parties reached a settlement and jointly requested withdrawal of their actions. The court permitted the withdrawals, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered a 20% reimbursement of court fees to each side.
BTL Medizintechnik GmbH v.Lexter Microelectronic Engineering Systems S.L.
Infringement proceedings before the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (The Hague Local Division) concerning European Patent EP4146335. The claimant, BTL Medizintechnik GmbH, requested withdrawal of the action pursuant to Rule 265.1 of the Rules of Procedure after reaching a settlement with the defendant. The defendant consented to the withdrawal, and the court allowed the withdrawal, declared the proceedings closed, and found no need for a cost decision.
XXX v.Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. / MicroTech Medical (Hangzhou) Co. Ltd., et al.
An unnamed applicant sought access to the case file of UPC_CFI_830/2025, a provisional measures action brought by Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. against MicroTech Medical and six other defendants concerning EP 3960072. The applicant claimed to represent an unnamed competitor in the continuous glucose measurement (CGM) device field needing a freedom-to-operate analysis. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) denied the application, finding the applicant had not demonstrated a sufficiently specific interest to override the integrity of the fast-tracked proceedings.
Maxell, Ltd. v.Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.
This is a procedural order from the Local Division The Hague of the Unified Patent Court concerning patent EP2061230. The court dismissed Samsung's request to extend the deadline for filing its rejoinder/reply submissions and admitted Maxell's 44 auxiliary requests into the proceedings. The court found the number of auxiliary requests reasonable given the large number of invalidity attacks asserted by Samsung and the manageable number of new features actually introduced.
Spyra v.Amycel LLC (UPC_CFI_499/2024)
The defendant, Spyra, filed an application under Rule 356 to set aside a decision by default issued against him in an infringement action brought by Amycel LLC concerning European patent EP 1 993 350 B2. The Court held that the application was inadmissible because the defendant had been put on notice in earlier orders (the R.275-Order and the R.320-Order) that a further decision by default would be final, and the same panel assessing the same factual and legal situation would not reach a different outcome. The Court rectified the default decision ex officio under Rule 353 to indicate that the proper legal remedy was an appeal within two months, not a Rule 356 application.
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v.Moderna et al.
Procedural order in patent infringement proceedings before the Local Division The Hague concerning European patents EP4066856 and EP4226941 owned by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA against multiple Moderna entities. The court exercised its discretionary power under R.302.1 RoP to order the defendants to split their counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_1526/2025), which concerned both patents, into two separate counterclaim actions—one per patent—due to procedural complexity, differing opposition stages at the EPO, and court fee considerations.
Advanced Cell Diagnostics, Inc. v.Molecular Instruments, Inc.
Advanced Cell Diagnostics, Inc., proprietor of European patents EP1910572 and EP2500439 relating to RNAscope in situ hybridization technology for detecting nucleic acids in individual cells, sued Molecular Instruments, Inc. for patent infringement regarding its HCR (Hybridization Chain Reaction) products. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) found both patents valid, dismissing the Defendant's counterclaim for revocation, but held that the Defendant's HCR products did not infringe the patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC v.Troy Chemical Company B.V. et al.
AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC filed infringement proceedings before the Local Division The Hague concerning European Patent EP3286270 against six defendants including Troy Chemical Company B.V. and several Azelis entities. No statement of defence or counterclaim was filed by any defendant, and the parties jointly requested a stay of proceedings. The Claimant subsequently requested withdrawal of the action with the Defendants' consent, and the Court granted the withdrawal, closed the proceedings, ordered confidentiality of certain annexes, and directed reimbursement of 60% of the court fees.
AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. v.Troy Chemical Company B.V. et al.
AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. initiated infringement proceedings before the Unified Patent Court Local Division in The Hague against Troy Chemical Company B.V. and several Azelis entities concerning European Patent EP3286270. After the Defendants failed to file any statement of defence or counterclaim, the parties jointly requested a stay of proceedings, and the Claimant subsequently requested withdrawal of the action with the Defendants' consent. The Court granted the withdrawal, declared certain confidential annexes restricted to the parties and the Court, and ordered reimbursement of 60% of the court fees (€96,600) to the Claimant.
Adeia Guides Inc. v.The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V. et al.
Procedural order issued by the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) following an interim conference in a patent infringement action brought by Adeia Guides Inc. against three Walt Disney entities concerning European Patent EP1969839. The court set the value of the dispute at €12 million, granted a confidentiality club, and addressed various procedural matters including late-filed prior art references and parallel litigation in multiple jurisdictions.
Avient Protective Materials B.V. v.Xingi Technology Co., Ltd et al.
This case concerns an action for infringement of European Patent No. 2 791 402 B1 (relating to Ultra-high Molecular Weight Polyethylene Multifilament Yarn) brought by Avient Protective Materials B.V. against two Chinese group companies. When service of process via the Hague Service Convention to China remained unconfirmed for over 3.5 months, the claimant sought alternative service under Rule 275 of the Rules of Procedure. The court granted the application, ordering that service could be effected by a German bailiff at the A+A Trade Fair in Düsseldorf upon the most senior staff member of the defendants present at their exhibition stand.
Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. v.Sinocare Inc. and A.Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l.
Abbott Diabetes Care sought provisional measures against Sinocare and Menarini alleging infringement of European patent EP 3 988 471 (relating to displays for a medical device) by Sinocare's GlucoMen iCan continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system, which Menarini distributes in Europe. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) dismissed the application, finding that the defendants' CGM system more likely than not does not infringe independent claims 1 and 14 of the patent because event data icons are not included in the timeline graph as required by the claims. Abbott was ordered to pay EUR 400,000 as an interim award of costs.
Amycel LLC v.XXX
Amycel LLC, proprietor of European Patent EP 1 993 350 B2 relating to brown mushrooms for commercial production, brought an infringement action against a Polish defendant for selling a competing brown mushroom strain called 'Cayene'. The defendant failed to file a timely Statement of Defence, leading to a decision by default after a Rule 275 order. The Court confirmed the orders previously granted in provisional measures proceedings, finding that the mushroom strain was not excluded from patentability under Article 53(b) EPC and that infringement was established.
Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. v.Sinocare Inc. and A.Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l.
Abbott Diabetes Care sought provisional measures before the Unified Patent Court against Sinocare and Menarini concerning European patent EP 4 344 633 for 'Analyte Sensor Assemblies' related to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems. Abbott alleged that the GlucoMen iCan CGM system, manufactured by Sinocare and distributed by Menarini in Europe, infringed its patent. The court granted the preliminary injunction, finding Abbott had established a strong prima facie case of infringement, the patent appeared valid, urgency existed, and the balance of interests favored Abbott.
HL Display AB v.Black Sheep Retail Products B.V.
The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division of the Hague) found that EP 2 432 351 B1, relating to a system for securing shelf accessories to a shelf, was valid and infringed by Black Sheep Retail Products B.V. (BSRP). The court granted injunctive relief, recall and destruction orders, information obligations, and damages against BSRP, while dismissing BSRP's counterclaim for revocation and declaring its counterclaim for a declaration of non-infringement inadmissible.
Data Detection Technologies Ltd. v.Esde Makine Otomasyon Tarım Teknolojileri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.
Data Detection Technologies Ltd. (DDT), proprietor of European Patent EP 2569713 B1 relating to a method and apparatus for dispensing items, filed an ex parte application for preservation of evidence against Esde Makine Otomasyon Tarım Teknolojileri Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. DDT alleged that Esde's Seed Counting Machine SD-14010, displayed at the Seed meets Technology 2025 trade fair in the Netherlands, infringed claims 1 and 8 of EP713. The Local Division The Hague granted the ex parte order, authorizing a bailiff to seize the SD-14010 and related documentation, appoint an expert and custodian, and conduct a detailed inspection, subject to conditions including confidentiality arrangements and a requirement that DDT initiate proceedings on the merits within 31 calendar days or 20 working days.
Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. v.INDUSTRIEBETEILIGUNGS- UND BERATUNGS GMBH, BEGA CONSULT INTERNATIONALE HANDELSAGENTUR GMBH & CO. KG, BEGA BBK SP. Z O.O. SP. K.UL., and NEG NOVEX WHOLESALE COMPANY FOR ELECTRICAL AND BUILDING SERVICES ENGINEERING GMBH
Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. sought provisional measures before the Local Division The Hague against members of the BEGA group and NEG Novex, alleging infringement of European Patent EP 3 522 755 B1 relating to a cabinet for housing a washing machine at waist level. The defendants had previously been licensed to manufacture such cabinets, but the license was terminated effective 1 August 2024. The court found a reasonable likelihood of validity and infringement, sufficient urgency, and granted the provisional measures including a prohibition on manufacturing and selling the accused 'Laundreezy' and 'Respekta Clara' cabinets, recall orders, information obligations, and penalty payments, along with a cost award of EUR 62,600.
Washtower IP B.V. and Washtower B.V. v.Wasombouw B.V., Industriebeteiligungs- und Beratungs GmbH, Bega Consult Internationale Handelsagentur GmbH & Co. KG, Bega BBK Sp. z o.o. Sp. K.ul., and NEG Novex Wholesale Company for Electrical and Building Services Engineering GmbH
This is a final procedural order of the Court of First Instance concerning provisional measures related to European Patent EP3522755, owned by Washtower IP B.V. Following a prior order of 11 September 2025, the applicants indicated their wish to enforce the injunctions, information order, penalty sums, and costs award against defendants 2-5. The Court confirmed receipt of security deposits totaling €50,000 and ordered electronic service of the final order on defendants 2-5, who had consented to service by email and waived their right to translations.
Unnamed Case from upc_ip.db v.Ex Parte
Order
Cilag GmbH International and Ethicon LLC v.RiVOLUTiON GmbH
Cilag GmbH International and Ethicon LLC (part of the Johnson & Johnson group) sought provisional measures against RiVOLUTiON GmbH, a German distributor of medical products, alleging infringement of European patent EP 3 689 262 relating to staple cartridges for surgical stapling devices. Cilag argued that Rivolution's distribution of infringing products from Bluesail Medical and David Medical, as well as its planned Bariatric Study using these products, constituted patent infringement. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court, Local Division The Hague, dismissed the application for provisional measures and ordered Cilag to pay EUR 80,000 in interim costs to Rivolution.
City Glass and Glazing Private Limited v.Maars Holding B.V., Maars Projecten B.V., Maars Partitioning Systems B.V., Maars France
City Glass and Glazing Private Limited, proprietor of European Patent EP 1 651 838 relating to a self-locking glazing system, sued the Maars group of companies for allegedly infringing the patent with their 'Horizon Products' (demountable glass walls). Maars counterclaimed for revocation of the patent. The Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) dismissed both the infringement claims and the counterclaim for revocation, and ordered City Glass to pay EUR 24,500 in legal costs and court fees to Maars.
HL Display AB v.Black Sheep Retail Products B.V.
This procedural order concerns a request by the defendant, Black Sheep Retail Products B.V. (BSRP), to deposit three physical objects (BB40A-C) as evidence in proceedings involving patent EP2432351. The claimant, HL Display AB, opposed the request as untimely. The Court of First Instance rejected the application, finding that BSRP provided no explanation for why the exhibits could not have been filed together with its rejoinder submitted on 20 February 2025.
HL Display AB v.Black Sheep Retail Products B.V.
This is a procedural order from the Court of First Instance concerning European Patent EP2432351, owned by HL Display AB. The defendant, Black Sheep Retail Products B.V. (BSRP), requested to deposit two physical objects as exhibit BB38 to support positions taken in its rejoinder. The claimant opposed the request as untimely, and the court dismissed the application, finding that no adequate explanation was provided for why the exhibits could not have been filed earlier.
Adeia Guides Inc. v.The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V. and Others
Procedural order from the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court (Local Division The Hague) concerning a deadline extension request in an infringement action involving European Patent EP1969839. The claimant Adeia Guides Inc. sought an extension due to late filing of exhibits 8 and 9 on 5 August 2025, to which the Walt Disney defendants did not object provided their subsequent deadlines were not shortened.
Genevant Sciences GmbH and Arbutus Biopharma Corporation v.Moderna Group Entities (UPC_CFI_191/2025 and UPC_CFI_192/2025)
This procedural order of the Local Division The Hague concerns a Rule 333 review of a Judge Rapporteur's order on preliminary objections raised by 15 Moderna entities in two infringement actions brought by Genevant Sciences GmbH and Arbutus Biopharma Corporation concerning European patents EP 2 279 254 and EP 4 241 767. Moderna had challenged the court's international jurisdiction, local jurisdiction, and long-arm jurisdiction over various defendants. The full panel confirmed the Judge Rapporteur's order and dismissed Moderna's request for interim appeal.
AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. v.Troy Chemical Company B.V. et al.
This is a procedural order from the Local Division The Hague of the Unified Patent Court in an infringement action concerning European Patent EP3286270, owned by AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. The parties mutually requested a stay of the proceedings until 13 February 2026, which the court granted pursuant to Rule 295(d) RoP. The claimant was ordered to inform the court within one week after 13 February whether the case is withdrawn or will resume.
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.