Judge Profile

LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS English SUBJECT

3 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.

Cases Presided Over

3 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1

patent LITIGATION · Feb 10, 2026

AWM S.r.l. and Schnell S.p.A. v.Progress Maschinen & Automation AG

Milan (IT) Local Division · UPC-000092

This case concerns an application by AWM S.r.l. and Schnell S.p.A. for a cost decision under R. 150 RoP following their successful infringement action and counterclaim for revocation against Progress Maschinen & Automation AG. Progress opposed the application, arguing that its appeal against the first instance decision triggered an automatic suspensive effect under Article 74(2) UPCA. The Court of First Instance, Milan Local Division, stayed the cost proceedings pending the outcome of Progress's appeal before the Court of Appeal.

patent LITIGATION · Oct 27, 2025

Progress Maschinen & Automation AG v.AWM s.r.l. and Schnell s.p.a.

Milan (IT) Local Division · UPC-000271

Progress Maschinen & Automation AG, proprietor of European Patent EP 2726230 B1 concerning a method and apparatus for continuously producing lattice girders, brought an infringement action against AWM s.r.l. and Schnell s.p.a. regarding their Girderflex and Girderflex VSX machines. The defendants counterclaimed for revocation, arguing that AWM had publicly disclosed the same technical solution through prior JIT machines before the patent's priority date. The Milan Local Division revoked the patent in its entirety for lack of novelty and inventive step, dismissed the infringement action, and ordered Progress to bear the costs.

patent LITIGATION · Nov 22, 2024

Insulet Corporation v.A. Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l.

Milan (IT) Local Division · UPC-001143

Insulet Corporation sought provisional measures from the Milan Local Division of the Unified Patent Court against A. Menarini Diagnostics, alleging infringement of European patent EP 4 201 327 through the sale of the EOPatch/GlucoMen Day Pump insulin patch pump. The Court dismissed the application, finding that Insulet failed to demonstrate with sufficient certainty that the patent was valid and infringed, and that the balance of interests did not favor granting the injunction. Insulet was ordered to pay EUR 117,465.00 as interim costs.

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 →