Judge Profile

in Klepsch

6 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

6 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1

patent LITIGATION · Jul 10, 2025

Nera Innovations Ltd. v.Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Inc., Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., and Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-000564

Nera Innovations Ltd. sued several Xiaomi group entities for infringement of the German and Dutch parts of European Patent EP 2 642 632 B1, which protects wireless power receivers, based on the Xiaomi 13 Pro and Xiaomi POCO F5 Pro 5G smartphones. The defendants filed a counterclaim for revocation, to which Nera responded with 33 auxiliary requests to maintain the patent in amended form. The Local Chamber Hamburg partially revoked the patent, declaring it null to the extent its subject matter extended beyond claim 1 as maintained in auxiliary requests 1 and 2, while dismissing the further-reaching revocation counterclaim.

patent LITIGATION · Jun 2, 2025

Lionra Technologies Ltd. v.Cisco Systems GmbH and Cisco Systems, Inc.

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-000649

The Local Chamber Hamburg of the Unified Patent Court ruled on an application by Lionra Technologies Ltd. for retroactive extension of time, alternatively reinstatement, regarding the missed deadline under R. 151 RoP for filing a cost determination application. The court rejected the primary request for retroactive extension of time, holding that R. 9.3(a) RoP only permits the court to decide retroactively on a timely-filed extension request, but granted the alternative request for reinstatement under R. 320.1 RoP, finding that the plaintiff's oversight by two employees within a proper four-eyes deadline control system constituted a reason beyond the party's control.

patent LITIGATION · Mar 7, 2025

Tridonic GmbH & Co. KG v.CUPOWER Shenzhen Xiezhen Electronics Co., Ltd and CUPOWER Europe GmbH

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-000884

The Local Chamber Düsseldorf of the Unified Patent Court dismissed both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation concerning European Patent EP 2 011 218 B1, which relates to a boost power factor correction (Boost-PFC) circuit. The court held that the accused LED driver embodiment did not infringe the patent because its capacitor did not satisfy the claimed decoupling element requirement, while also rejecting the defendants' validity attacks, including new arguments raised only at the oral hearing.

patent LITIGATION · Feb 19, 2025

Lionra Technologies Ltd. v.Cisco Systems, Inc. and Cisco Systems GmbH

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-000917

Lionra Technologies Ltd. sued Cisco Systems, Inc. and its German subsidiary Cisco Systems GmbH for infringement of European Patent EP 2 201 740 B1, which relates to fast packet processing in wireless networks. Cisco filed a counterclaim for revocation. The Local Chamber Hamburg dismissed both the infringement claim and the counterclaim for revocation, leaving the patent in its granted form, and ordered the plaintiff to bear 40% and the defendants 60% of the costs.

patent LITIGATION · Sep 13, 2024

Grundfos Holding A/S v.Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump Co., Ltd.

Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division · UPC-001275

This is a procedural order issued by the Local Chamber Düsseldorf of the Unified Patent Court in proceedings concerning European Patent EP 2 778 423 B1. The court decided, pursuant to Article 33(3)(a) UPCA in conjunction with Rule 37.2 of the Rules of Procedure, to hear both the infringement action brought by Grundfos Holding A/S and the counterclaim for revocation filed by Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump Co., Ltd. jointly before the same panel.

patent LITIGATION · Aug 26, 2024

Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE

Hamburg (DE) Local Division · UPC-001306

Avago Technologies sued Tesla Germany GmbH and Tesla Manufacturing Brandenburg SE for infringement of European Patent EP 1 612 910 B1, which relates to a power control system for electronic circuits, alleging that Tesla's Model Y vehicles using AMD Ryzen processors infringed the patent. Tesla filed a counterclaim for revocation. The Local Chamber Hamburg of the Unified Patent Court partially revoked the patent in its main request but maintained it in a modified auxiliary request form, finding partial infringement and allocating costs 85% to Avago and 15% to Tesla.

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 →