Syngenta Limited v. Sumi Agro Limited; Sumi Agro Europe Limited

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

In this UPC Court of Appeal decision, the court granted a stay of revocation proceedings following an appeal by Juul Labs against a prior finding. The request was based on parallel opposition proceedings before the EPO Boards of Appeal which had been accelerated. Given that the EPO proceedings were expected to conclude rapidly relative to the scheduled UPC hearing, the court ruled in favor of granting the stay, allowing both parties to await the final outcome at the EPO.

Daedalus Prime LLCvsXiaomi Inc.

This UPC preliminary order addressed a dispute over the confidentiality of documents related to the transfer of Patent EP2792100 from its original owner to Daedalus Prime LLC. The Claimant sought highly restricted access, arguing that details like purchase price were confidential and irrelevant to technical employees. The Court ultimately granted limited access to two specific in-house legal counsels on the Defendants' side (Xiaomi/MediaTek), while denying broader access to all personnel, thereby balancing commercial secrecy with procedural fairness.

Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. LimitedvsTesla Germany GmbH

This decision addresses the procedural competence regarding the withdrawal of a cost determination application in an ongoing UPC case. Although the main infringement and revocation proceedings have moved to the Appeal Court, the specific procedure for determining costs remains under the jurisdiction of the court of first instance's Rapporteur. The court confirmed its original authority to grant the request to withdraw the cost claim, thereby closing that phase of the litigation.

Headwater Research LLCvsSamsung Electronics France S.A.S, Samsung Electronics GmbH, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.

This procedural order in the Headwater v. Samsung case sets the stage for a complex UPC trial concerning patent infringement and revocation of EP 2 391 947. The Court confirmed the oral hearing date and formally established the financial scope of the dispute, valuing the claim at €2 million and the counterclaim at €3 million. While settlement discussions were noted, the court maintained strict procedural control over evidence and arguments, particularly regarding late-filed documents and invalidity attacks.

Rematec GmbH & Co KGvsEurope Forestry B.V.

In this UPC case, Rematec GmbH & Co KG sued Europe Forestry B.V. for infringing its patent covering a grinding mill used for crushing wood chips. The court ultimately declared the European Patent EP 2 548 648 fully invalid across several member states. This decision highlights the rigorous scrutiny applied by the UPC regarding inventive step, particularly when features are found to be obvious in light of existing technical literature.