|
01/10/2024 |
Menarini v. Eoflow, Insulet |
UPC_CFI_380/2024 |
|
ORD_52068/2024 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Central Division - Section |
English |
|
RoP 313 application to intervene - requirements -preliminary injunction |
application to intervene - intervention - intervene |
|
|
30/09/2024 |
Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH, Xiaomi Technology France S.A.S, Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., Odiporo GmbH, Shamrock Mobile GmbH, Xiaomi Technology Italy S.R.L v. Panasonic |
UPC_CoA_543/2024 |
APL_52763/2024 |
ORD_53866/2024 |
Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
German |
|
|
|
|
|
27/09/2024 |
Microsoft Corporation v. Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy |
UPC_CFI_164/2024 |
App_42517/2024 |
ORD_45914/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
The Court may order a security for legal costs when the financial position of the respondent gives rise to a legitimate and real concern that a possible order for costs may not be recoverable and/or the likelihood that a possible order for costs by the Unified Patent Court may not, or in an unduly burdensome way, be enforceable. |
burden of proof, security, costs |
|
|
27/09/2024 |
AUDI AG v. Network System Technologies LLC |
UPC_CoA_217/2024 |
App_53212/2024 |
ORD_53777/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
26/09/2024 |
Dolby International AB v. Optoma Corporation, Optoma Deutschland GmbH, Optoma Europe Ltd. |
UPC_CFI_226/2024 |
|
ORD_53245/2024 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
|
|
|
|
26/09/2024 |
Panasonic v. Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., Xiaomi Technology France S.A.S, Xiaomi H.K. Limited, Shamrock Mobile GmbH, Xiaomi Inc., Beijing Xiaomi Mobile Software Co. Ltd., Odiporo GmbH, Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH, Xiaomi Technology Italy S.R.L |
UPC_CFI_220/2023 |
App_31889/2024 |
ORD_39681/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
Der Berichterstatter legt einen Antrag auf Aussetzung nach Regel 295 VerfO dem Spruchkörper zur Entscheidung vor. |
Vorlage an den Spruchkörper, R 102.1 VerfO, Aussetzungsantrag, R 295 VerfO, Berichterstatter |
|
|
25/09/2024 |
Heraeus Electronics v. Vibrantz |
UPC_CFI_114/2024 |
App_33728/2024 |
|
Amend Document |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
Der Antrag auf Klageänderung ist nur zum Teil erfolgreich. |
R 263 VerfO, Klageänderung |
|
|
25/09/2024 |
Heraeus Precious Metals GmbH & Co. KG v. Vibrantz GmbH |
UPC_CFI_114/2024 |
App_48805/2024 |
ORD_53396/2024 |
Preliminary objection |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
Die Nichtigkeitswiderklage kann auch gegen den eingetragenen Patentinhaber gerichtet werden. |
R 42, materieller Patentinhaber, R 25.1, R 361, eingetragener Patentinhaber, R 363, R 305.1(c), Nichtigkeitswiderklage |
|
|
25/09/2024 |
Innovative Sonic Corporation v. Lenovo, Motorola, Digital River |
UPC_CFI_340/2024 |
App_52697/2024 |
|
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
|
Übereinstimmender Antrag, R. 295 (d) VerfO, Aussetzung |
|
|
25/09/2024 |
Mammut Sports Group AG, Mammut Sports Group GmbH v. Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH |
UPC_CoA_182/2024 |
APL_21143/2024 |
ORD_44387/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.1 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
German |
|
|
|
|
|
25/09/2024 |
Magna PT s.r.o., Magna International France, SARL, Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG v. Valeo Electrification |
UPC_CFI_347/2024 |
|
ORD_53404/2024 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
1. Evidence in PI proceedings is generally and primarily to be submitted in writing (R. 170.1 (a) and (b) RoP), with particular importance being attached to the submission of affidavits (R. 170.2 (h) RoP). In addition, the submission of physical objects, in particular devices, products, em-bodiments, exhibits and models (R. 170.1 (c) RoP), and of electronic files and au-dio/video files (R. 170.1 (d) RoP) may be an option. 2.The Court does not summon witnesses in PI proceedings and does not provide simultaneous interpretation in this respect. |
PI proceedings, Summon of witnesses, R. 210.2 RoP, Evidence |
|
|
24/09/2024 |
Eoflow v. Insulet |
UPC_CFI_380/2024 |
App_50666/2024 |
ORD_51234/2024 |
Application Rop 333 |
Court of First Instance - Milan (IT) Central Division - Section |
English |
|
Article 340 RoP - concept of "panels" - conditions for joinder- issuing of order by the judge rapporteur |
connection joinder |
|
|
24/09/2024 |
Unilever France v. I.G.B. S.r.l. |
UPC_CFI_494/2023 |
App_49796/2024 |
ORD_52883/2024 |
Amend Document |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division |
French |
|
1. Pursuant R. 263 RoP, a party may only be authorized, by the Court, to change its claims, on the twofold condition that the amendment could not have been made with reasonable diligence at an earlier stage of the proceedings and that it is not such as to disturb in an unreasonable way the conduct of the case. 2. The autorisation given by the Court, under rule R. 263 RdP, only concerns changed claims which have the effect of changing the subject matter and the scope of the dispute. 3. Changed claims that only complete those previously made do not constitute substantial modifications, which are likely to modify and affect the subject matter and the scope of the dispute and only relate to the implementation and enforcement modalities of a possible sentence. |
|
|
|
23/09/2024 |
Erik Krahbichler, SWAT Medical AB v. Edwards Lifesciences, Meril |
UPC_CFI_189/2024 |
App_33484/2024 |
ORD_36092/2024 |
Application RoP262.1 (b) |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
1. The mere fact of operating in the same field as the patent in dispute is not sufficient to establish a specific interest in the case documents on the part of the applicant. |
public access to register |
|
|
20/09/2024 |
Magna PT s.r.o., Magna International France, SARL, Magna PT B.V. & Co. KG v. Valeo Electrification |
UPC_CFI_347/2024 |
App_51893/2024 |
ORD_52043/2024 |
Application RoP262A |
Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
18/09/2024 |
AUDI AG v. Network System Technologies LLC |
UPC_CoA_264/2024 |
APL_30168/2024 |
ORD_48996/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.2 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
18/09/2024 |
Apple Retail Germany B.V. & Co. KG, Apple Distribution International Ltd., Apple GmbH, Apple Retail France EURL, Apple Inc. v. Ona Patents SL |
UPC_CoA_354/2024 |
APL_ 38948/2024 |
ORD_48659/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.1 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
18/09/2024 |
Google Commerce Limited, Google Ireland Limited v. Ona Patents SL |
UPC_CoA_349/2024 |
APL_38206/2024 |
ORD_48660/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.1 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
18/09/2024 |
Erik Krahbichler v. Edwards Lifesciences, Meril, Smis |
UPC_CFI_8/2023 |
App_33493/2024 |
ORD_36466/2024 |
Application RoP262.1 (b) |
Court of First Instance - Nordic Baltic Regional Division |
English |
|
Article 45 UPCA means that also the written procedure of the Court shall, in principle, be open to the public unless the Court decides to make it confidential, to the extent necessary, in the interest of one of the parties or other affected persons, or in the general interest of justice or public order. If a person has made an application under Rule 262.1(b) for access to pleadings or evidence and provided a credible explanation for why he/she wants access, the application shall be approved unless it is necessary to keep the information confidential. |
RoP 262.1 (b) |
|
|
17/09/2024 |
Mala Technologies Ltd. v. Nokia Technology GmbH |
UPC_CoA_227/2024 |
APL_26889/2024 |
ORD_43637/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.2 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
17/09/2024 |
AUDI AG v. Network System Technologies LLC |
UPC_CoA_217/2024 |
APL_25919/2024 |
ORD_48916/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.2 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
17/09/2024 |
Jef Nelissen v. OrthoApnea S.L., Vivisol B BV |
UPC_CFI_376/2023 |
ACT_581538/2023 |
ORD_598476/2023 |
Infringement Action |
Court of First Instance - Brussels (BE) Local Division |
Dutch |
|
The use of pleading notes and visual representations/aides at the oral hearing is permitted if they are communicated to the opposing party in a timely manner. The use of physical examples/models is permitted at the oral hearing if they are filed as an additional exhibit at the registry and if they are communicated to the opposing party. Whether or not a valuation is "sufficient" in the light of the possible recoverable costs (in application of R. 152.3. RoP) does not concern any factor to be taken into consideration in assessing the valuation of the case. |
Value of action, Oral Hearing, Interim Conference |
|
|
17/09/2024 |
Dexcom International Limited |
UPC_CFI_424/2023 |
App_44664/2024 |
ORD_45345/2024 |
Amend Document |
Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division |
English |
|
Leave to amend counter claim with a declaration of non-infringement granted after withdrawal of the infringement claim against one device (of two). R. 263.2 RoP requirements complied with. |
amendment of claim |
|
|
17/09/2024 |
Microsoft Corporation v. Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy |
UPC_CFI_164/2024 |
App_40799/2024 |
ORD_41174/2024 |
Application Rop 333 |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
|
|
|
|
17/09/2024 |
Volkswagen AG v. Network System Technologies LLC |
UPC_CoA_218/2024 |
APL_25922/2024 |
ORD_48922/2024 |
Appeal RoP220.2 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
EN
DE
FR
NL