Marjolein Visser
4 IP cases indexed. Covers patent matters.
Cases Presided Over
4 cases indexed | Page 1 of 1
CooperSurgical, Inc. v.European Distribution Center Motiva BVBA, Establishment Labs S.A. and PulseLavage AB
This case concerned an infringement action filed by CooperSurgical, Inc. before the Unified Patent Court (Local Division Brussels) regarding EP 3 302 292 B1. After the European Patent Office Opposition Division revoked the patent on 30 September 2025, the Claimant withdrew the action. The Court allowed the withdrawal and assessed the costs to be reimbursed to the Defendants, ordering the Claimant to pay €105,757.90 to Defendants 1-2 and €81,423.33 to Defendant 3, while also ordering reimbursement of 60% of the court fees to the Claimant.
Honeywell Control Systems Ltd. v.Sovex Systems B.V. et. al.
Honeywell Control Systems Ltd. initiated a patent infringement action before the Local Division Mannheim against seven defendants concerning EP 2 563 695 B1. The defendants filed a preliminary objection challenging international jurisdiction over Hemtech (domiciled in Bosnia and Herzegovina), competence over five Dutch defendants, and the competence of the Mannheim division, seeking transfer to The Hague. The court rejected all preliminary objections, finding that international jurisdiction and competence were properly established, and declined to grant leave to appeal.
Toyota Motor Europe v.Respondent
Central Division Paris Seat Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Central Division (Paris Seat) delivered on 31. July 2025 ACT 579176/2023 UPC_CFI-361/2023 PARTIES: Claimant: Toyota Motor Europe NV/SA, Avenue du Bourget 60, 1140 Evere, Belgiu
AYLO PREMIUM LTD v.DISH Technologies L.L.C.
This is a revocation action concerning European Patent EP 3 822 805 B1, brought by Aylo Premium Ltd. against DISH Technologies L.L.C. before the Central Division (Paris Seat) of the Unified Patent Court. The Claimant sought full revocation of the patent, while the Defendant filed a Statement of Defence and an Application to amend the Patent, including auxiliary requests. The headnote establishes that the Court can, if requested, limit the scope of revocation of a European patent to national parts validated in individual UPC Member States, with the key legal issues being added matter and claim interpretation.
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.