technology — European UPC Patent Cases
1,714 decisions indexed
Page 56 of 58 · 1,714 total
Amagen Inc. v.Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland, Sanofi -Aventis Groupe S.A., Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A., Regeneron pharmaceuticals Inc.
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2024-01-02) under reference UPC-001647, Amagen Inc. appeared in dispute with Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland, Sanofi -Aventis Groupe S.A., Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A., Regeneron pharmaceuticals Inc. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Mathys & Squire v.Astellas, Healios, Riken, Osaka University
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Central Division - Section (decision issued on 2023-12-28) under reference UPC-001648, Mathys & Squire appeared in dispute with Astellas, Healios, Riken, Osaka University concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. v.Dexcom Inc., Dexcom International Limited
1 The Hague - Local Division UPC_CFI_424/2023 Final Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 22 December 2023 Date of receipt of Statement of claim : Not provided Dexcom Inc. (Defendant) - 6340 Sequence Drive - CA 92121-4356 - San Diego -
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.Ltd., OROPE Germany GmbH v.Panasonic Holdings Corporation
This order concerns a procedural request by the Appellants (Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. and OROPE Germany GmbH) for expedition of appeal proceedings, specifically seeking shortening of the time period for lodging the Statement of response pursuant to R.9.3(b) RoP. The appeal was directed against an order of the Court of First Instance concerning the language of the proceedings under R.323 RoP. The Court of Appeal dismissed the request, finding that the interests of the Respondent (Panasonic Holdings Corporation) and principles of due process outweighed the Appellants' interest in expedition, even though this meant the Statement of defence in the main proceedings would have to be lodged in the contested language of proceedings.
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.Ltd., OROPE Germany GmbH v.Panasonic Holdings Corporation
This order concerns an appeal before the Court of Appeal against an order of the Court of First Instance regarding the language of the proceedings under R.323 RoP. The Appellants (OPPO and OROPE Germany) filed a request on the last day of the time periods under R.224.1(b) and R.224.2(b) RoP for expedition of the appeal proceedings, seeking shortening of the time period for lodging the Statement of Response. The Court of Appeal dismissed the request for expedition, holding that despite the procedural inconvenience, the interests of the Respondent and principles of due process required that the Statement of Response be filed in the normal time period, even though this meant the Statement of Defence in the first instance proceedings had to be lodged in the contested language of proceedings.
N.V. Nutricia v.Nestlé Health Science (Deutschland) GmbH
This case before the Local Division Düsseldorf concerned European Patent EP 2 359 858 B1, which was finally revoked during the proceedings. The Claimant (N.V. Nutricia) sought closure of both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation, while the parties disputed the value of the dispute. The Court set the value of the infringement action at €250,000 and the counterclaim for revocation at €500,000, ordered the Claimant to bear the costs of both proceedings, and granted a 60% reimbursement of court fees to the Claimant.
Dexcom, Inc. v.Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Diabetes Care inc, Abbott France, Abbott NV/SA, Abbott B.V, Abbott S.r.l, Abbott Sacandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott GmbH, Abbott Diagnostics Gmbh, Abbott Logistics B.V
This is a procedural order from the Paris Local Division concerning an infringement action brought by DexCom, Inc. against fourteen defendants, primarily comprising various Abbott entities and Newyu, Inc., regarding European Patent EP3831282. The order addresses service difficulties and aligns the deadline for filing the Statement of Defence across all defendants. The Judge-Rapporteur accepted the parties' agreed extension, setting the Statement of Defence deadline to 15 March 2024, with the starting point aligned to 15 December 2023.
HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P v.LAMA FRANCE
1 Division locale de Paris UPC_CFI_358/2023 Ordonnance de procédure du Tribunal de première instance de la Juridiction unifiée du brevet, rendue le 02/08/2024 concernant R.191 RdP DEMANDEUR HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P 10300 Energy Drive, Spring, Harris County, TX, 77389, USA - 77389 - H
Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.Ltd., OROPE Germany GmbH v.Panasonic Holdings Corporation
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court dismissed a request by the Appellants (OPPO and OROPE) for expedition of the appeal, specifically seeking shortening of the time period under R.9.3(b) RoP for lodging the Statement of response. The request was filed on the last day of the time periods under R.224.1(b) and R.224.2(b) RoP in an appeal against an order concerning the language of proceedings (R.323 RoP). The Court held that the request had to be dismissed in view of the interests of the respondent and principles of due process, even though this meant the Statement of defence in the first instance proceedings would have to be lodged in the contested language of proceedings.
N.V. Nutricia v.Nestle Health
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-14) under reference UPC-001660, N.V. Nutricia appeared in dispute with Nestle Health concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Ocado Innovation Limited v.Autostore companies
In this legal proceeding before Luxembourg (LU) (decision issued on 2023-12-11) under reference UPC-001665, Ocado Innovation Limited appeared in dispute with Autostore companies concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Panasonic Holding Corporation v.Xiaomi Techniligy Germany GmbH
In this legal proceeding before Mannheim (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-08) under reference UPC-001666, Panasonic Holding Corporation appeared in dispute with Xiaomi Techniligy Germany GmbH concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
10xGenomics Inc., President and Fellows of Harvard College v.NanoString Technologies Inc. et al.
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-05) under reference UPC-001668, 10xGenomics Inc., President and Fellows of Harvard College appeared in dispute with NanoString Technologies Inc. et al. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH
In this legal proceeding before Hamburg (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-05) under reference UPC-001667, Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited appeared in dispute with Tesla Germany GmbH concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. v.Expert e-Commerce GmbH u. a.
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-04) under reference UPC-001671, Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. appeared in dispute with Expert e-Commerce GmbH u. a. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
*** v.PROGRESS MASCHINEN & AUTOMATION AG, AWMS.R.L., SCHNELL S.P.A.
In this legal proceeding before Milan (IT) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-12-04) under reference UPC-001670, *** appeared in dispute with PROGRESS MASCHINEN & AUTOMATION AG, AWMS.R.L., SCHNELL S.P.A. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Panasonic Holdings Corporation v.Xiaomi Inc. et al.
Panasonic Holdings Corporation filed a patent infringement action against ten Xiaomi-related defendants concerning European Patent EP 3 024 163. The present order addressed Panasonic's application for document production against itself, accompanied by a request for confidentiality protection. The court issued a final consolidated confidentiality order, accepting most of the defendants' requested modifications to the provisional order, including clarifying the scope of legal representatives, expanding access to three named reliable persons, removing the return/destruction obligation, and setting a penalty of up to 100,000 EUR per culpable violation.
myStromer AG v.Revolt Zycling AG, George Merachtsakis
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-11-22) under reference UPC-001676, myStromer AG appeared in dispute with Revolt Zycling AG, George Merachtsakis concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE v.HELIOS K.K, OSAKA UNIVERSITY
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Central Division - Section (decision issued on 2023-11-20) under reference UPC-001677, ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE appeared in dispute with HELIOS K.K, OSAKA UNIVERSITY concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE v.HELIOS K.K, OSAKA UNIVERSITY
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Central Division - Section (decision issued on 2023-11-17) under reference UPC-001678, ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE appeared in dispute with HELIOS K.K, OSAKA UNIVERSITY concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Ocado Innovation Limited v.Third Party
In this legal proceeding before Luxembourg (LU) (decision issued on 2023-11-06) under reference UPC-001682, Ocado Innovation Limited appeared in dispute with Third Party concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v.Tesla Germany GmbH
In this legal proceeding before Hamburg (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-11-03) under reference UPC-001683, Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited appeared in dispute with Tesla Germany GmbH concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
President and Fellows of Harvard College v.NanoString Technologies Europe Limited
NanoString Technologies Europe Limited filed an action for revocation of European Patent 2 794 928 against Harvard before the Munich Section of the Central Division of the Court of First Instance. The Central Division revoked the patent entirely and ordered Harvard to bear NanoString's legal costs, prompting Harvard to appeal. After the appeal was filed, NanoString applied to withdraw the action, refrain from a cost decision, and release the security deposit of €300,000 it had previously provided.
10xGenomics, Inc., President and Fellows of Harvard College v.NanoString Technologies Inc.
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-10-26) under reference UPC-001687, 10xGenomics, Inc., President and Fellows of Harvard College appeared in dispute with NanoString Technologies Inc. concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
AIM Sport Vision AG v.Supponor Oy, Limited, SASU, España SL, Italia SRL
In this legal proceeding before Helsinki (FI) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-10-20) under reference UPC-001689, AIM Sport Vision AG appeared in dispute with Supponor Oy, Limited, SASU, España SL, Italia SRL concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Plant-e Knowledge B.V., Plant-e B.V. v.Arkyne Technologies S.L.
This document is uploaded for technical (CMS ) reasons only, in order to close the workflow. Margot Elsa KOKKE Digitally signed by Margot Elsa KOKKE Date: 2024.12.13 17:26:00 +01'00'
myStromer AG v.Revolt Zycling AG
In this legal proceeding before Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division (decision issued on 2023-10-18) under reference UPC-001690, myStromer AG appeared in dispute with Revolt Zycling AG concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
OCADO INNOVATION LIMITED v.AUTOSTORE AS
In this legal proceeding before Nordic Baltic Regional Division (decision issued on 2023-10-17) under reference UPC-001692, OCADO INNOVATION LIMITED appeared in dispute with AUTOSTORE AS concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Groupe S.A., Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. v.Amgen, Inc.
This appeal before the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court concerned the date of service of a Statement of claim and the extension of procedural deadlines. The appellants (Sanofi entities and Regeneron) challenged a procedural order of the Munich Local Division that had rejected their request to recalculate the deadlines for lodging a Preliminary objection and Statement of defense based on the later availability of Annexes. The Court of Appeal set aside the impugned order, holding that while a Statement of claim without Annexes can be validly served under Rule 271 RoP, non-compliance with Rule 13.2 RoP (requiring simultaneous upload of Annexes) constitutes a reasoned request for extension of the terms under Rules 19.1 and 23 RoP.
ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE v.HELIOS K.K, RIKEN, OSAKA UNIVERSITY
In this legal proceeding before Munich (DE) Central Division - Section (decision issued on 2023-10-11) under reference UPC-001695, ASTELLAS INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE appeared in dispute with HELIOS K.K, RIKEN, OSAKA UNIVERSITY concerning patent rights and legal remedies.
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.