10x Genomics, Inc. , President and Fellows of Harvard College v. Vizgen, Inc.

NJOY Netherlands B.V.vsJuul Labs International, Inc.

NJOY Netherlands B.V. brought a revocation action against European Patent EP 3 504 989 (titled 'VAPORIZATION DEVICE SYSTEMS'), owned by Juul Labs International, Inc., before the Central Division (Paris Seat) of the Unified Patent Court. NJOY argued the patent was invalid for added matter, lack of novelty, and lack of inventive step, while Juul Labs sought to maintain the patent as granted or as amended. The Court revoked the patent as granted but maintained it in amended form based on Auxiliary Request 1, ordering each party to bear its own costs.

WIRPLAST Więcek Spółka JawnavsVilpe Oy

Revocation action brought by WIRPLAST – Więcek Spółka Jawna (Poland) against Vilpe Oy (Finland) concerning European patent EP 2 649 380 before the Central Division (Section Munich) of the Unified Patent Court. Following an interim conference held on 9 October 2025, the judge-rapporteur issued procedural orders regarding the timeliness of submissions, translation requirements for evidence documents, reordering of auxiliary requests, and the admission of a warning letter into the proceedings. The oral hearing was confirmed for 3 December 2025 in Munich, with the value of the case set at EUR 630,000.

Network System Technologies LLCvsQualcomm Incorporated a.o.

Network System Technologies LLC, a patent licensing company, brought an infringement action against Qualcomm entities regarding European Patent EP 1 552 399 (relating to integrated circuits with network-on-chip interconnects), while the Qualcomm defendants filed a counterclaim for revocation. The Local Division Munich dismissed both the infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation, finding that the Claimant failed to present its infringement allegations in a conclusive manner and that its application for production of source code evidence was speculative and unsupported.

Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.vsMediaTek, Inc. and MediaTek Germany GmbH

This is a procedural order from the Local Chamber Mannheim concerning an application by MediaTek Germany GmbH under Rule 190 of the Rules of Procedure for the production of license agreements referenced by Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. in the context of infringement proceedings regarding EP 3 567 731. The court partially granted the application, ordering Huawei to produce the license agreements it had identified on pages 2 and 3 of its August 15, 2025 submission with its reply to the statement of defense, while rejecting the request for two additional agreements and for ancillary agreements/amendments.

Centripetal LimitedvsPalo Alto Networks, Inc.

This procedural order from the Local Division Mannheim concerned Centripetal Limited's application for a penalty order against Palo Alto Networks, Inc. for alleged non-compliance with a saisie (inspection) order related to European Patent EP 3 281 580. The court rejected the request, finding that Palo Alto was under no obligation to actively set up access rights or bring hardware to the Munich premises, as the inspection order only covered what was physically present at the specified location. The panel confirmed the Judge-rapporteur's order and denied leave to appeal.