Genentech Inc. v. F. Hoffmann – La Roche AG, Organon & Co., Organon Heist B.V., NV Organon, Shanghai Henlius Biotech Inc

TOTAL SEMICONDUCTOR, LLCvsTexas Instruments Incorporation; Texas Instruments Deutschland GmbH; Texas Instruments EMEA Sales GmbH

In this UPC case concerning a semiconductor patent, the court addressed a critical procedural issue: security for costs. The Defendants successfully argued that the Claimant, a non-practicing entity structured as a licensing company, should provide financial guarantees to cover potential legal expenses. The Court rejected the Claimant's arguments regarding its startup status and co-working space operations, upholding the requirement for security. This decision reinforces the UPC's strict stance on ensuring procedural fairness and cost recovery in infringement actions.

Network System Technologies LLCvsQualcomm Incorporated

In this complex international patent dispute, Network System Technologies LLC brought an infringement action against Qualcomm Incorporated concerning European Patent EP 1 552 399, which relates to integrated circuits and transaction methods. The court ultimately dismissed the infringement claim because the Claimant failed to conclusively substantiate its allegations during the oral hearing. This decision highlights the stringent burden of proof required in UPC proceedings, emphasizing that mere dispute is insufficient when a party bears the burden of proving infringement.

Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc.vsKoninklijke Philips N.V. Et al

Advanced Brain Monitoring, Inc. brought an infringement action against Philips and its subsidiaries regarding a position therapy device covered by EP 2 437 696 B2. However, the Defendants successfully mounted a counterclaim for revocation. The UPC Court of First Instance ultimately ruled that the patent was invalid and revoked it entirely. This decision highlights the significant risk associated with maintaining patents in the UPC without robust validity defenses.

MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte Gesellschaft m.b.H.vsAdvanced Bionics AG, Advanced Bionics GmbH, Advanced Bionics Sarl

In this UPC case, MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte Gesellschaft m.b.H. initiated proceedings against Advanced Bionics entities regarding patent EP 4 074 373 B1. However, the parties mutually agreed to withdraw the claim. The court formally granted the withdrawal and terminated the case. This decision highlights how mutual settlements can lead to a swift conclusion of complex UPC litigation.

Ecovacs Robotics Co., Ltd.vsRoborock (HK) Limited

This UPC Court of Appeal decision addresses the strict procedural requirements governing ex parte orders for evidence preservation. Ecovacs sought an inspection order against Roborock, but the Local Division revoked it due to incomplete disclosure by Ecovacs regarding Roborock's direct market activities. The Court of Appeal upheld this revocation, stressing that applicants have a heightened duty under R. 192.3 RoP to disclose all material facts influencing the court’s decision, regardless of whether those facts are later introduced in the main action.