European UPC Patent Cases
1,878 decisions indexed
Page 4 of 63 · 1,878 total
Vereenigde Octrooibureaux N.V., Carnegieplein 5, 2508 DH Den, Rechtsanwalt Dr. Volkmar Henke, Rechtsanwalt Dr. Tilman v.Optoma Deutschland GmbH, vertreten durch ihre Geschäftsführe, Rechtsanwalt Dr. Andreas Kramer, Powell Gilbert, Königsal-
This order concerns an application by Vereenigde Octrooibureaux N.V., as a member of the public, for access to the court files of a concluded patent infringement case (Dolby v. Optoma) concerning European Patent EP 3 605 534. The applicant sought access to better understand why Dolby considered the patent essential to the Opus Audio Codec standard. The court held the application partially admissible and partially well-founded, granting limited access to the statement of claim while rejecting access to exhibits as insufficiently specified.
Germany), (2) JANSSEN BIOTECH, INC. (*) v.2SEVENTY BIO, INC.
In this legal proceeding before Brussels - Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-23) under reference UPC_9FF93D3A0F, Germany), (2) JANSSEN BIOTECH, INC. (*) appeared in dispute with 2SEVENTY BIO, INC. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Franz Kaldewei GmbH & Co. KG, gesetzlich vertreten durch ihr, Rechtsanwältin, v.Bette GmbH & Co. KG, gesetzlich vertreten durch ihre Komplem, Rechtsanwalt Jens Künzel, LL.M., KRIEGER MES & GRAF v. der
The Local Chamber Düsseldorf issued a procedural order on a third-party request for access to court files from a completed patent infringement case between Franz Kaldewei GmbH & Co. KG and Bette GmbH & Co. KG concerning European Patent EP 3 375 337 B1. The applicant, the law firm Gulde & Partner, sought access to pleadings and evidence for internal training and preparation purposes before the Unified Patent Court. The original parties initially opposed the request citing trade secret concerns, but the plaintiff later withdrew its confidentiality objections while the defendant narrowed its claims to specific information about distribution channel removal measures. The court held the request admissible and partially meritorious, granting access to most documents but with redactions where confidentiality interests prevailed.
Verfahrensvertreter: Linklaters LLP, Taunusanlage 8, 60329 F, Anlage 35-37, 60327 Frankfurt am Main v.Golkowsky, Joachimsthaler Straße 10-12, 10719 Berlin, PENTARC Rechtsanwälte PartG mbB, Schmellerstraße 4, 80337 Mü
This case concerned a nullity action filed by ALD France S.A.S against Nanoval GmbH & Co. KG regarding European Patent EP 3 083 107 B1 before the Central Division (Paris Seat) of the Unified Patent Court. The plaintiff applied to withdraw the nullity action, and the defendant consented. The court granted the withdrawal and terminated the proceedings, but reduced the plaintiff's request for a 60% reimbursement of court fees to 50%, applying the amended Rule 370.9(b) of the Rules of Procedure that entered into force on January 1, 2026.
InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc.,, 300, Wilmington, Delaware 19809, USA v.The Walt Disney Company, 500 S Buena Vista St, Burbank, CA 9, Disney Interactive, 500 S Buena Vista St, Burbank, CA 91521,
InterDigital VC Holdings sued multiple Walt Disney Company entities for alleged direct infringement of European patent EP 2 465 265, which relates to video encoding and decoding technology, targeting the Disney+ streaming service. The defendants filed a counterclaim for revocation. The Local Division Mannheim found infringement of claims 1 and 15, granted injunctive relief, recall/removal orders, information disclosure, and declared the defendants jointly and severally liable for damages, while dismissing the counterclaim for revocation.
PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRIA GMBH, Andreas Haberl, Preu Bohlig & Partner Rechtsanwälte mbB, Leo v.DANIELI & C. S.P.A., LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS
In this legal proceeding before Milan Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-22) under reference UPC_A6ED7D66C6, PRIMETALS TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRIA GMBH, Andreas Haberl, Preu Bohlig & Partner Rechtsanwälte mbB, Leo appeared in dispute with DANIELI & C. S.P.A., LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc., 2237 Faraday Ave, CA 92008, v.1) Koninklijke Philips N.V., High Tech Campus 34, 5656 AE Ei, 2) Philips RS North America LLC, 1001 Murry Ridge Lane, Murr
In this legal proceeding before The Hague Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-22) under reference UPC_17AE80A1FE, Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc., 2237 Faraday Ave, CA 92008, appeared in dispute with 1) Koninklijke Philips N.V., High Tech Campus 34, 5656 AE Ei, 2) Philips RS North America LLC, 1001 Murry Ridge Lane, Murr concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Prinoth S.p.A. v.Xelom s.r.l.
This case before the UPC Local Division of Milan concerns patent infringement claims by Prinoth against Xelom regarding European patents EP 2507436 and EP 1995159, both relating to snow groomer (battipista) technology. Following an ex parte evidence preservation order executed in April 2025, Prinoth sought additional evidence including document production, physical inspection, and judicial experiments to prove infringement. The Judge Rapporteur granted the request for physical inspection and wei
Raimund Beck Nageltechnik GmbH - Raimund-Beck-Straße 1 - 527 v.BAUSSMANN Collated Fasteners GmbH – Eibachstraße 15 - 57413, Jochen Bühling, KRIEGER MES Rechtsanwälte PartmbB.
The Central Division (Munich) of the Unified Patent Court partially invalidated European Patent EP 4 283 140 B1 concerning a fastening element made of wood and/or wood materials. The plaintiff Raimund Beck Nageltechnik GmbH sought nullity of claims 1, 2, 5, and 8–11 on grounds of inadmissible extension, lack of novelty, and lack of inventive step. The court held the nullity action partially successful, declaring the patent partially invalid to the extent it exceeded the subject matter of auxilia
LiNA Medical AG, with its principal address Platz 3, 6039 Ro, schaft von Rechtsanwälten mbB, Jakob-Klar-Straße 14, 80796 v.Tonglu Qianyan Medtech Co., Ltd., Room 101, Building 6, Medi, Mr. Sam Lee, with a business address at Tonglu Qianyan Medte
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-20) under reference UPC_A9F8C2DA68, LiNA Medical AG, with its principal address Platz 3, 6039 Ro, schaft von Rechtsanwälten mbB, Jakob-Klar-Straße 14, 80796 appeared in dispute with Tonglu Qianyan Medtech Co., Ltd., Room 101, Building 6, Medi, Mr. Sam Lee, with a business address at Tonglu Qianyan Medte concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
OXFORD NANOPORE TECHNOLOGIES PLC v.MGI TECH GmbH, MGI TECH CO., LIMITED, BGI HANGZHOU CYCLONESEQ TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, SHENZHEN BGI GENOMICS CO., LTD
Oxford Nanopore Technologies PLC filed an application for provisional measures against MGI entities alleging infringement of four European patents relating to 'Cyclone Devices'. After the judge-rapporteur set a deadline of 24 July 2026 for MGI to file its objection, Respondent 1 (MGI TECH GmbH) sought an extension of that deadline. The judge-rapporteur rejected the extension request, finding that more than two weeks from service was sufficient given the respondents' prior awareness of the patents from parallel Australian proceedings and Oxford's withdrawal of two of the four patents.
VALEO SYSTEMES D’ESSUYAGE v.Respondent
Procedural order of the Paris Local Division of the Unified Patent Court concerning a request for extension of time filed by the Bosch defendants. The judge-rapporteur rejected Bosch's request, finding that a non-redacted version of Valeo's 15 June 2026 filing had been deposited in the CMS simultaneously with the redacted version, and that Bosch had failed to exercise due diligence in accessing it. The court ruled that the deadlines under R.29(d) RdP run from 15 June 2026.
Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany v.Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, United States of America, Nathalie Sabotier, legally qualified judge
In this legal proceeding before Court of Appeal (decision issued on 2026-07-17) under reference UPC_CD8ADAC83B, Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany appeared in dispute with Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, United States of America, Nathalie Sabotier, legally qualified judge concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
FUJIFILM Corporation, Tokyo, Japan v.Kodak, S.A., Madrid, Spain, LANGUAGE OF THE CASE
This appeal concerned the allocation of costs in a revocation action regarding European patent EP 4 082 804 (a lithographic printing plate precursor patent). After Fujifilm surrendered the patent and requested disposal of the action under Rule 360 RoP, the Central Division Paris ordered Fujifilm to bear the costs. The Court of Appeal set aside that cost decision, holding that Kodak unnecessarily initiated the revocation proceedings because Fujifilm had not given rise to the action and had surren
Lionra Technologies Ltd. v.Cisco Systems GmbH
This is a decision of the Court of Appeal concerning a withdrawal of appeal and a request for reimbursement of court fees. The underlying infringement action and counterclaim for revocation concerning EP 2 201 740 had been dismissed by the Local Division Hamburg on 19 February 2025. After Lionra filed an appeal, the parties reached an out-of-court settlement and jointly informed the court that the oral hearing should not proceed. Lionra requested withdrawal of its appeal and reimbursement of 20% of the appeal-stage court fees, with Cisco consenting and withdrawing its cross-appeal in the alternative.
Imusyn GmbH & Co. KG, Feodor-Lynen-Str. 5, 30625 Hannover, D, durch die imusyn Beteiligungs GmbH, ebenda, diese gesetzlich v.BAG Diagnostics GmbH, Amtsgerichtsstr. 1-5, 35423 Lich, Deut, ihre Geschäftsführer Dr. Ingo Dunya Meier und Dr. Nicolas Sa
This procedural order concerns the defendant's request to classify certain information as confidential under Rule 262.2 of the Rules of Procedure. The defendant, BAG Diagnostics GmbH, sought protection for a settlement agreement and cease-and-desist declaration from prior injunction proceedings between the parties, as well as information about internal processes and distribution activities. The Local Chamber Düsseldorf granted the request, classifying the specified information as confidential, while noting that any general exclusion from third-party access would require a case-by-case balancing of interests under Rule 262.6.
Pirelli Tyre S.p.A. v.Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber Co., Ltd.
Rectification order from the UPC Local Division of Milan concerning patent EP 3 519 207 B1 ('motorcycles tyre'). Pirelli Tyre S.p.A. filed an application under Rule 353 RoP seeking correction of a material error in a prior decision dated 26.5.2026, which erroneously stated that Pirelli had filed an opt-out declaration on 30.6.2023 later withdrawn on 26.11.2024. The court found the rectification request admissible and ordered deletion of the incorrect sentence.
AIM SPORT DEVELOPMENT AG, Luzern, Switzerland v.TGI SPORT FRANCE SASU (previously SUPPONOR SASU), Biot, Fran, TGI SPORT ITALIA S.R.L. (previously SUPPONOR ITALIA SRL), Bu
In this legal proceeding before Helsinki Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-16) under reference UPC_3C3EC632A8, AIM SPORT DEVELOPMENT AG, Luzern, Switzerland appeared in dispute with TGI SPORT FRANCE SASU (previously SUPPONOR SASU), Biot, Fran, TGI SPORT ITALIA S.R.L. (previously SUPPONOR ITALIA SRL), Bu concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Emboline, Inc., Santa Cruz, United States, Partner Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte mbB, Munich, Germany and v.AorticLab srl, Samone, Italy, law of the law firm André Roland, Lausanne, Switzerland
In this legal proceeding before Court of Appeal (decision issued on 2026-07-16) under reference UPC_71B075FF11, Emboline, Inc., Santa Cruz, United States, Partner Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte mbB, Munich, Germany and appeared in dispute with AorticLab srl, Samone, Italy, law of the law firm André Roland, Lausanne, Switzerland concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd., Shenzhen City, People', Tecno Mobile Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL), Stockholm, Sweden, □ Order of the Local Division of The Hague issued on 27 May
This order concerns three appeal proceedings (UPC-CoA-100/2026, UPC-CoA-101/2026, and UPC-CoA-102/2026) brought by Shenzhen Transsion against an order of The Hague Local Division granting Ericsson's application for confidentiality measures in underlying infringement proceedings relating to three European patents in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. Following a settlement between the parties, Shenzhen Transsion applied to withdraw the appeals and sought reimbursement of 50% of the appeal court fees. The Court of Appeal permitted the withdrawal with Ericsson's consent, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of EUR 2,000 (50% of the EUR 4,000 appeal fees) to Shenzhen Transsion.
Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd., Shenzhen City, People', Tecno Mobile Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR v.Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (PUBL), Stockholm, Sweden, □ Order of the Local Division of The Hague issued on 27 May
This order concerns three appeal proceedings (UPC-CoA-100/2026, UPC-CoA-101/2026, UPC-CoA-102/2026) brought by Shenzhen Transsion against an order of The Hague Local Division granting Ericsson's application for confidentiality measures in underlying infringement proceedings concerning three European patents (EP 2 712 236, EP 3 836 631, EP 3 245 744) in the field of 4G LTE and 5G NR technology. Following a settlement between the parties that provided for termination of the underlying proceedings, Shenzhen Transsion applied to withdraw the appeals, and Ericsson consented. The Court of Appeal permitted the withdrawal, declared the proceedings closed, and ordered reimbursement of 50% of the appeal court fees (EUR 2,000) to Shenzhen Transsion.
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten, (Claimant) - Hansastraße 27c - 80686 - München – DE v.Acer Computer GmbH, Kornkamp 4, 22926 Ahrensburg, Germany,, Acer Italy s.r.L, Viale Delle Industrie, 1/A, 20044 Arese (M
The Local Division Hamburg issued a procedural order granting the Claimant's request under Rule 190 RoP for the production of evidence by a third party. The Claimant, Fraunhofer, sought comparable license agreements relating to the Opus standard held by the third party (acting as administrator of a patent pool) in order to respond to the Defendants' FRAND defense in infringement proceedings concerning EP2304723. Both the Defendants and the third party consented to the production under a proposed confidentiality regime, and the Court ordered the documents to be produced within two weeks, classified as 'Highly Confidential Information'.
23 February 2026 v.Respondent
A European Patent Attorney applied to be registered on the list of representatives before the Unified Patent Court under Article 48(2) UPCA, relying on a CEIPI diploma and a University of Warsaw diploma. The Registrar rejected the application, and the applicant filed a petition for review, arguing technical difficulties with the CMS and disproportionate burden. The President of the Court of Appeal held the petition admissible but unfounded, finding that the applicant's qualifications did not mee
26 February 2026 v.Respondent
The President of the Court of Appeal rejected an Applicant's petition for review of the Registrar's decision denying confirmation of his registration on the list of entitled representatives under Art. 48(3) UPC Agreement. The Applicant had sought confirmation of an alleged prior registration rather than a new registration, but failed to provide clear and convincing evidence that he had ever filed an application in the Case Management System (CMS). The Court held that the petition was admissible but unfounded, as the Applicant could not demonstrate that any prior application had been submitted through the mandatory CMS filing system.
Fives ECL, Ronchin, Frankreich v.Respondent
This order from the Court of Appeal concerns requests for confidentiality and a potential change of the language of proceedings in an appeal between Fives ECL and REEL GmbH regarding patent EP 1 740 740. The first instance Local Division Hamburg had dismissed Fives' infringement claim for damages on February 11, 2026, finding that Fives failed to sufficiently demonstrate lost profits and the required causal link. Fives appealed and filed a confidentiality request under Rules 262.2 and 262A of the Rules of Procedure. The Court of Appeal addressed the inclusion of a former employee in the confidentiality circle, the continuation of the first instance confidentiality order during appeal proceedings, and the possibility of filing submissions in English.
Amazon.com, Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA, Amazon Technologies, Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA v.InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, USA, InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, US
In this legal proceeding before Mannheim Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-15) under reference UPC_BA52E97E61, Amazon.com, Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA, Amazon Technologies, Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA appeared in dispute with InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, USA, InterDigital Patent Holdings, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, US concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany v.Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, United States of America, Nathalie Sabotier, legally qualified judge
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf (hereinafter referred to as: “Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-15) under reference UPC_C4717FD4F5, Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany appeared in dispute with Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, United States of America, Nathalie Sabotier, legally qualified judge concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
VALEO SYSTEMES D’ESSUYAGE v.Respondent
This is a procedural order of the Unified Patent Court's Local Division of Paris concerning patent infringement action UPC_CFI_1963/2025 (with related case UPC_CFI_1247/2026). Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyage, holder of EP4144599, sought to limit its infringement claims against six Bosch group entities by excluding certain APX-series products, withdrawing claims against Belgian and German territories, and withdrawing all claims against Defendant 5 (BOSCH PRODUKTIE). The judge-rapporteur authorized the
Boa Technologies Inc., Dr. Benjamin Grzikmek (CASALONGA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH v.(1) FLA Europe NV, Francois Herpe, Cornet Vincent Ségurel 251, boulevard Pereir
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf - Local Division (decision issued on 2026-07-15) under reference UPC_516F9F2DAB, Boa Technologies Inc., Dr. Benjamin Grzikmek (CASALONGA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH appeared in dispute with (1) FLA Europe NV, Francois Herpe, Cornet Vincent Ségurel 251, boulevard Pereir concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
CA, Inc., gesetzlich vertreten durch das Board of Directors,, fornia 95131, USA v.Deutsche Telekom AG, vertreten durch ihren Vorstand, Friedri, T-Systems International GmbH, vertreten durch die Geschäftsf
This procedural order concerns a request by the defendants for protection of confidential information under Rules 262.2 and 262A of the Rules of Procedure in an infringement dispute regarding European Patent EP 1 934 794 B1. The Local Chamber Düsseldorf granted the request in part, classifying sales figures, infrastructure details, enforcement consequences, and internal technical and commercial information as confidential, but rejected protection for customer names and customer-related information on the ground that such information was already publicly available. The preliminary order of June 17, 2026 was partially lifted to the extent it had covered customer information.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.