24/01/2025 |
Dexcom, Inc. / Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Diabetes Care inc, Abbott France, Abbott NV/SA, Abbott B.V, Abbott S.r.l, Abbott Sacandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott GmbH, Abbott Diagnostics Gmbh, Abbott Logistics B.V |
UPC_CoA_505/2024 |
App_68655/2024 |
ORD_68847/2024 |
Application Rop 265 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Institute Of Professional Representatives Before The European Patent Office v. Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy, Microsoft Corporation |
UPC_CFI_164/2024 |
App_67889/2024 |
ORD_67980/2024 |
Application RoP262.1 (b) |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
The interest in ensuring that the parties present their arguments and evidence and that the Court conducts the proceedings impartially and independently, without influence and interference from external parties in the public sector, is of the paramount importance and, as such, prevails over the competing interest in access to the case file where this latter interest cannot be satisfied through access to the written pleadings or evidence of the proceedings as the matter at hand concerns a purely legal and general issue. |
public access to register |
|
24/01/2025 |
Dexcom, Inc. / Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Diabetes Care inc, Abbott France, Abbott NV/SA, Abbott B.V, Abbott S.r.l, Abbott Sacandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott GmbH, Abbott Diagnostics Gmbh, Abbott Logistics B.V |
UPC_CoA_569/2024 |
ORD_3184/2025 |
ORD_3184/2025 |
Generic Order |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Headwater Research LLC v. Samsung Electronics GmbH, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics France S.A.S |
UPC_CFI_54/2024-UPC_CFI_396/2024 |
App_66588/2024 |
ORD_68686/2024 |
Amend Document |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Heraeus Electronics Gmbh & Co. Kg v. Vibrantz Gmbh |
UPC_CFI_114_448/2024 |
ACT_13227/2024 |
ORD_68785/2024 |
Infringement Action |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Photon Wave Co., Ltd. v. Seoul Viosys Co., Ltd. |
UPC_CFI_238/2024 |
ORD_3876/2025 |
ORD_3876/2025 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Tcl Deutschland Gmbh & Co. Kg, Tcl Operations Polska Sp. Z.O.O, Tct Mobile Germany Gmbh, Tct Mobile Europe Sas |
UPC_CFI_487/2023 |
App_2192/2025 |
ORD_2322/2025 |
Application Rop 265 |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
In accordance with Rule 370 RoP, analogous court fees are payable for the filing of a counterclaim for a FRAND-license offer. |
Reimbursement court fees, Counterclaim FRAND-offer, Obligation to pay court fees, Withdrawal |
|
24/01/2025 |
Newyu,Inc., Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Laboratories A/S, Abbott Scandinavia Aktiebolag, Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Abbott Gmbh, Abbott Logistics B.V., Abbott S.R.L., Abbott Gesellschaft M.B.H., Abbott Oy, Abbott Diagnostics Gmbh, Abbott, Abbott B.V. |
UPC_CoA_840/2024 |
App_1178/2025 |
ORD_3985/2025 |
Application Rop 265 |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
English |
|
|
|
|
24/01/2025 |
Sanofi v. Accord Healthcare, Stadapharm, Reddy, Betafarm, Zentiva |
UPC_CFI_145_147_148_374_463_496_503/2024 |
CC_49716/2024 |
ORD_68846/2024 |
Counterclaim for revocation |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
23/01/2025 |
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd., Meril Gmbh |
UPC_CFI_815/2024 |
App_3108/2025 |
ORD_3774/2025 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
Deadline extension |
|
23/01/2025 |
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Gmbh, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. |
UPC_CFI_815/2024 |
ORD_3866/2025 |
ORD_3866/2025 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
Reference is made to the order of the Central Division, Paris Seat, of 30 July 2024 (APP_37662/2024 UPC_CFI_367/2023). The Court intends to follow this reasoning. |
Rule 262.2 RoP, application for confidentiality, cost proccedings, Rule 262A RoP |
|
23/01/2025 |
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Gmbh, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. |
UPC_CFI_815/2024 |
App_2875/2025 |
ORD_3758/2025 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
Rule 295.d RoP, partial stay, R 295.d RoP |
|
23/01/2025 |
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v. Meril Gmbh, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd. |
UPC_CFI_815/2024 |
App_2876/2025 |
ORD_3764/2025 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
Rule 295.d RoP |
|
22/01/2025 |
Fujifilm Corporation v. Kodak Gmbh, Kodak Graphic Communications Gmbh , Kodak Holding Gmbh |
UPC_CFI_365/2023 |
ACT_579338/2023 |
ORD_598567/2023 |
Infringement Action |
Court of First Instance - Mannheim (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
22/01/2025 |
Sanofi Winthrop Industrie, Sanofi S.R.L., Sanofi B.V., Sanofi Ab, Sanofi-Aventis Gmbh, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh, Sanofi Mature Ip, Sanofi Belgium, Sanofi A/S, Sanofi - Produtos Farmaceuticos Lda v. Accord Healthcare Ab, Accord Healthcare S.L.U., Accord Healthcare Gmbh, Accord Healthcare Italia Srl, Accord Healthcare Bv, Accord Healthcare B.V., Accord Healthcare, Unipessoal Lda. |
UPC_CFI_145/2024 UPC_CFI_146/2024 UPC_CFI_147/2024 UPC_CFI_148/2024 |
ORD_3577/2025 |
ORD_3577/2025 |
Generic Order |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
Order following an oral argument hearing (“preliminary interim conference”). |
preliminary interim conference, Rule 105.5 RoP, oral argument hearing |
|
22/01/2025 |
Mammoet Holding B.V. v. P.T.S Machinery B.V. |
UPC_CFI_16/2025 |
ACT_1474/2025 |
ORD_3693/2025 |
Application for preserving evidence pursuant to RoP192 |
Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division |
English |
|
|
|
|
22/01/2025 |
Njoy Netherlands B.V v. Vmr Products Llc |
UPC_CFI_310/2023 |
ACT_571730-2023 |
ORD_598526/2023 |
Revocation Action |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
Defendant's alternative request to maintain the patent at suit with respect to one or more of its dependent claims is a sufficiently clear request, even if it does not specify a particular claim, and, as such, imposes on the Court the obligation to rule on the matter and decide which claims, if any, remain valid. |
common general knowledge, late filed documents, validity of the patent |
|
21/01/2025 |
Njoy Netherlands B.V. v. Vmr Products Llc |
UPC_CFI 311/2023 |
ACT_571745/2023 |
ORD_598528/2023 |
Revocation Action |
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat |
English |
|
In order to assess whether or not a claimed invention lacks inventive step, it is first necessary to determine one or more realistic starting points in the state of the art, which would be of interest to a person skilled in the art who, at the priority date of the patent in suit, was seeking to develop a product or process similar to that disclosed in the prior art. In particular, realistic starting points are the documents which disclose the main relevant features as those disclosed in the challenged patent or which address the same or a similar underlying problem. |
inventive step |
|
21/01/2025 |
Air Up Group Gmbh |
UPC_CFI_508/2023 |
App_64021/2024 |
ORD_68822/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
1. The rules on service in the Rules of Procedure must be interpreted in accordance with the principle of effective legal protection. It must therefore always be possible to establish good service, at least in accordance with Rule 275.2 of the Rules of Procedure. 2. Where it has not been possible to serve the application for a provisional measure in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure and where there is no indication that the decision by default, which is issued subsequently in the same proceedings, can be served in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure, it is not necessary to attempt to serve the decision by default in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure before an order is made under Rule 275.2 of the Rules of Procedure. |
decision by default, effective legal protection, service |
|
21/01/2025 |
Kipa Ab v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v Meril Gmbh, Meril Life Sciences Pvt Ltd, Smis, Sormedica |
UPC_CFI_380/2023 |
App_33375/2024 |
ORD_42124/2024 |
Application RoP262.1 (b) |
Court of First Instance - Nordic Baltic Regional Division |
English |
|
There is no legal basis for ordering a member of the public, who has made a request for access to written pleadings and evidence, to reimburse legal costs incurred by the parties to the relevant proceedings when they are consulted by the judge-rapporteur in accordance with Rule 262.1(b) RoP. Article 69 UPCA does not apply in this situation. Therefore, such requests for reimbursement of costs shall be dismissed. |
Article 69 UPCA, Rule 265 RoP, access to pleadings and evidence, Rule 262.1(b) RoP, legal costs, withdrawal, |
|
21/01/2025 |
Air Up Group Gmbh |
UPC_CFI_509/2023 |
App_64978/2024 |
ORD_68821/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
1. The rules on service in the Rules of Procedure must be interpreted in accordance with the principle of effective legal protection. It must therefore always be possible to establish good service, at least in accordance with Rule 275.2 of the Rules of Procedure. 2. Where it has not been possible to serve the application for a provisional measure in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure and where there is no indication that the decision by default, which is issued subsequently in the same proceedings, can be served in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure, it is not necessary to attempt to serve the decision by default in accordance with Rule 274 of the Rules of Procedure before an order is made under Rule 275.2 of the Rules of Procedure. |
decision by default, effective legal protection, service |
|
21/01/2025 |
Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd.,v. Aiko Energy Germany GmbH, Solarlab Aiko Europe GmbH, Powerdeal Srl |
UPC_CFI_336/2024 UPC_CFI_605/2024 |
App_3072/2025 |
ORD_3416/2025 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division |
English |
|
|
dismissal, Request for rectification, redacted version |
|
21/01/2025 |
XSYS Italia S.r.l., XSYS Germany GmbH, XSYS Prepress N.V. V. Esko-Graphics Imaging GmbH |
UPC_CFI_483/2024 |
App_65942/2024 |
ORD_68820/2024 |
Generic application |
Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division |
German |
|
|
|
|
20/01/2025 |
Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon Europe Core S.À R.L. , Amazon Eu S.À R.L. v. Nokia Technologies Oy |
UPC_CoA_835/2024 |
ORD_3182/2025 |
ORD_3182/2025 |
Generic Order |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
German |
|
|
|
|
20/01/2025 |
Amazon.Com, Inc., Amazon Europe Core S.À R.L. v. Nokia Technologies Oy |
UPC_CoA_835/2024 |
App_68644/2024 |
ORD_68818/2024 |
Application RoP262A |
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU) |
German |
|
|
|
|