Netgear Inc. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd.

Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.vsSamsung Bioepis NL B.V.

This procedural order from the UPC Court of Appeal addressed Alexion Pharmaceuticals' appeal against a prior decision concerning provisional measures. The core issue was Alexion's request for an expedited hearing, arguing that the matter was purely legal and required swift resolution. The Court ultimately rejected this request, emphasizing the need to balance due process with the respondent's interests, thereby maintaining standard procedural timelines.

Atlas Global Technologies GmbHvsTP-LINK CORPORATION PTE. LTD.

In a case involving TP-LINK and Atlas Global Technologies, the Düsseldorf Local Court issued an order suspending the ongoing infringement and revocation proceedings concerning EP 3 353 901 and EP 3 186 937. The suspension was reached by mutual agreement between all parties involved in the litigation. This procedural step allows both sides to pause the UPC action while awaiting final decisions from the European Patent Office (EPO) or the conclusion of opposition appeals.

Seoul Viosys Co., LtdvsLaser Components SAS

In a significant decision for the LED industry, the UPC Local Division of Paris found Laser Components SAS liable for infringing Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd.'s patent EP3404726. The court granted a permanent injunction against the sale and use of the infringing UVC LED chips across France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Furthermore, the respondent was ordered to provide extensive sales and distribution data, allowing the claimant to proceed with calculating full damages.

Fingon LLCvsSamsung Electronics GmbH

This procedural order in the UPC case concerning EP 2 839 403 addressed a dispute over whether the Claimant's introduction of new technical details and product examples constituted an impermissible amendment to the infringement action. The Court determined that providing further illustrative examples of existing functionalities, even on newly released models, does not change the nature or scope of the original dispute. Consequently, while the request to exclude these submissions was postponed for a full panel review, all other procedural requests by the Defendants were dismissed.

Dolby International ABvsEpson France SAS

In this UPC case, Dolby International AB sued Epson France SAS (among others) for alleged infringement of EP 3 605 534B1. The defense raised a preliminary objection arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction because the claimant's withdrawal from the Opt-out regime was invalid. The Local Division of Hamburg dismissed this opposition, finding that the procedural requirements had been met and allowing the case to proceed. This decision clarifies the strict procedural requirements for managing opt-outs within the UPC framework.