Judge Profile

Bessaud

12 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

12 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1

patent LITIGATION · Feb 5, 2026

Adeia Guides Inc. v.The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V. et al.

The Hague (NL) Local Division · UPC-000094

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.

patent LITIGATION · Jan 28, 2026

Labrador Diagnostics LLC v.bioMérieux SA and Others

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000105

Labrador Diagnostics LLC brought an infringement action against bioMérieux SA and five of its European subsidiaries concerning European patent EP 3 756 767 B1, which relates to instruments and methods for detecting biological analytes. The Düsseldorf Local Division bifurcated the case, referring the counterclaim for revocation to the Milan Central Division, which amended the patent to maintain only two claims. The court dismissed the infringement action, finding no direct or indirect infringement of the amended claims by the challenged VIDAS 3 instrument and related reagent strips and Solid Phase Receptacles, and ordered the Claimant to bear the costs.

patent LITIGATION · Oct 14, 2025

Wonderland Nurserygoods Co., Ltd. v.Cybex GmbH and Others

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000295

The Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court upheld a judge-rapporteur's order denying the claimant's application for leave to change its claim to add an auxiliary request asserting infringement by equivalence for additional patent features. The defendants had requested a panel review under R. 333 RoP, arguing the reasoning was disadvantageous to them. The panel found the review admissible but rejected it on the merits, confirming that extending the equivalence argument to features 1.9 and 1.10 did not alter the nature or scope of the dispute.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 8, 2025

CeraCon GmbH v.Sunstar Engineering Europe GmbH (EP 4 108 413)

Mannheim (DE) Local Division · UPC-000459

This procedural order from the Mannheim Local Division concerns a request for review of a judge-rapporteur's order that had dismissed CeraCon GmbH's application to amend its counterclaim for revocation of EP 4 108 413 by introducing a new novelty attack based on Euro-PCT application EP 3 868 480 A1. The panel confirmed the earlier order, holding that the amendment was excluded under R. 263.2(a) RoP because CeraCon failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in discovering the prior art. The request for review was rejected.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 5, 2025

Wonderland Nurserygoods Co., Ltd. v.Cybex GmbH, Columbus Trading-Partners GmbH & Co. KG, Cybex Retail GmbH

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000464

Procedural order issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning European patent EP 1 905 615. The court exercised its discretion under Rule 37.2 of the Rules of Procedure to jointly hear the patent infringement action brought by Wonderland Nurserygoods Co., Ltd. against the Cybex entities and the counterclaim for revocation, rather than bifurcating the proceedings. The decision was made for reasons of efficiency and to ensure that validity and infringement are decided on the basis of a uniform interpretation of the patent by the same panel.

patent LITIGATION · Apr 23, 2025

Labrador Diagnostics LLC v.bioMérieux SA, bioMérieux Deutschland GmbH, bioMérieux Italia S.p.A., bioMérieux Austria GmbH, bioMérieux Portugal Lda., and bioMérieux Benelux BV

Milan (IT) Central Division- Section · UPC-000753

This is a procedural order from the Düsseldorf Local Division concerning European Patent EP 3 756 767 B1. The court exercised its discretion under Article 33(3)(b) UPCA to refer the counterclaim for revocation to the Milan Central Division, where a revocation action was already pending, while proceeding with the infringement action. The Claimant requested the referral and the Defendants did not object, leading the Panel to treat the matter as a unanimous request.

patent LITIGATION · Mar 20, 2025

Adeia Guides Inc. v.The Walt Disney Company (Benelux) B.V., The Walt Disney Company Limited, Disney Interactive Studios, Inc.

Munich (DE) Local Division · UPC-000857

This is a procedural order from the Local Division Munich of the Unified Patent Court concerning the rectification of a scheduling order in an infringement action. The court corrected a typo in the scheduling order dated 18 March 2025, specifying the details of the oral hearing venue and time.

patent LITIGATION · Jan 10, 2025

Valeo Electrification v.Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., and Magna International France, SARL

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001044

This case before the Düsseldorf Local Division concerned European Patent EP 3 320 604 B1. The Claimant, Valeo Electrification, filed a patent infringement action on 2 August 2024, and the Defendants filed a counterclaim for revocation on 8 November 2024. Prior to closure of the written procedure, both parties mutually withdrew their respective claims and counterclaims, and agreed that neither party would seek reimbursement of costs.

patent LITIGATION · Jan 10, 2025

Valeo Electrification v.Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., and Magna International France, SARL

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001042

This case concerned European Patent EP 3 320 602 B1 before the Düsseldorf Local Division. The Claimant (Valeo Electrification) filed a patent infringement action on 2 August 2024, and the Defendants filed a counterclaim for revocation on 8 November 2024. Prior to closure of the written procedure, both parties mutually withdrew their respective claims and agreed that neither party would seek reimbursement of costs. The Court allowed both withdrawals and declared all proceedings closed.

patent LITIGATION · Nov 20, 2024

Valeo Electrification v.Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., and Magna International France, SARL

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001154

The Defendants filed an application under R. 353 RoP seeking rectification of an Order dated 31 October 2024, which had granted provisional measures against them concerning EP 3 320 604 B1. They sought three corrections: adding '2 Series Gran Coupé' to the list of exempted BMW models, clarifying that a French vindication action covered both French and German parts of the patent, and amending a statement about an obligation to update a list. The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed the application, finding no clerical mistakes, errors in calculation, or obvious slips in the original Order.

patent LITIGATION · Nov 20, 2024

Valeo Electrification v.Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG, Magna PT s.r.o., and Magna International France, SARL

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001152

The Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed an application by the Defendants (Magna entities) for rectification of an earlier order dated 31 October 2024, which had granted provisional measures against them in favor of the Applicant (Valeo Electrification) concerning EP 3 320 602 B1. The Defendants sought three corrections: adding the BMW model '2 Series Gran Coupé' to the exemption list, clarifying that a French vindication action also covered the German and Slovak parts of the patent, and correcting a statement about the parties' agreement to update a list. The Court found no obvious slips warranting rectification under R. 353 RoP and dismissed the application.

patent LITIGATION · Jul 3, 2024

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. v.Sibio Technology Limited & Umedwings Netherlands B.V.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001414

This case before the Düsseldorf Local Division concerned an application for provisional measures by Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. regarding European Patent EP 2 393 417 B1, directed against Sibio Technology Limited and Umedwings Netherlands B.V. The parties reached a settlement during the oral hearing, which the court confirmed pursuant to Rule 365.1 of the Rules of Procedure. The court also ordered a 20% refund of court fees to the Applicant and set the value of the application at 4,000,000 EUR.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

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.

Consult our team →