The inclusion of another member state in the list of countries for which a judgment for patent infringement is requested extends the scope of the original action. The claimant stated in their application that at the…
Read more →Oct 20, 2025
According to R 171 and 172 RoP, a party that relies on a fact that is disputed or could be disputed by the other side must specify the evidence. This means that every party filing a claim must compile the documents…
Read more →Financial compensation for the use of the published EP application also falls within the jurisdiction of the UPC (Article 32(1)(f) UPCA). Since such compensation is not regulated in either the EPatVO or the UPCA, the…
Read more →The applicant has a legitimate interest in the exchange of the security for costs. They originally decided to deposit the security for enforcement to ensure immediate enforcement of the preliminary injunction. It would…
Read more →Even if a strict literal interpretation of R 150 et seq. RoP does not necessarily suggest this, these provisions can apply to a costs decision after the dismissal of an application for a preliminary injunction,…
Read more →The infringement of a right of the patent proprietor is imminent within the meaning of Article 62(1) UPCA if the infringement has not yet occurred, but there are serious and tangible factual indications based on…
Read more →Questions of fact and law that are relevant both for jurisdiction under the UPCA in relation to the national courts of the Member States and for the merits of the action are generally not to be decided in the procedure…
Read more →R 30 RoP does not restrict the patent proprietor in their application for amendment of the patent to the prerequisite that the application and the corresponding auxiliary applications must be in direct connection with…
Read more →At the time the action was brought before the Munich Local Division, proceedings for the issuance of interim measures were pending between the same parties regarding the same patent before the Court of Appeal (the…
Read more →A declaration to cease and desist without a penalty clause by one or two, but not all defendants belonging to a corporate group and jointly infringing a patent, can not safeguard the patent proprietor's interest in the…
Read more →An objection under R 19 RoP can also be raised against a counterclaim for revocation. Article 33(2) UPCA is to be interpreted as meaning that this provision is not only applicable when an action is brought between the…
Read more →Article 33(1)(b) UPCA allows for suing several defendants at the domicile, principal place of business, or – if none exists – at the establishment of one of the defendants, provided that there is a business relationship…
Read more →According to the CJEU 25. 2. 2025, C-339/22, BSH Haushaltsgeräte, the UPC remains competent for infringement actions concerning patents in non-UPCA Member States even if the defendant disputes the validity of that…
Read more →The service of the application for interim measures with the support of the competent Chinese authority was unsuccessful, although the application could be sent by post to the competent Chinese authority and the…
Read more →The claimant demands that a third party in ancillary proceedings transmit information in accordance with R 191 Alt 2 RoP. The defendant and the third party objected to the requested information transmission, with the…
Read more →The patent in suit relates to arrangements in wireless networks. In particular, it relates to a method and a device for high-speed processing of protocol headers in an intermediate and/or destination node of a…
Read more →The applicant requests that they be permitted to take a measurement on a machine exhibited at a trade fair. Based on the information available to them so far, the applicant has plausibly demonstrated why they assume…
Read more →Sep 26, 2025
If the court determines that a party's representative cannot effectively represent them and grants the party a period of time to appoint a new representative, it may require that the appointment be accompanied by a…
Read more →If the court sees no reason to order security for the enforcement of interim measures on its own initiative, the defendant may nevertheless present arguments and facts demonstrating that the outcome could be different…
Read more →Pursuant to Article 60(1) UPCA, the court may, at the request of the applicant who has presented all reasonably available evidence to substantiate the claim that the patent has been or is at risk of being infringed,…
Read more →
We keep a close eye on recent legal developments, provide up-to-date advice, and develop strategies that turn new decisions to your advantage.
Contact us →