IP Bridge’s Geely injunction stayed in Brazil; GWM proceedings show ongoing enforcement

Context:

• In recent months, IP Bridge initiated a series of standard-essential patent (SEP) enforcement actions in Brazil against Chinese automotive manufacturers, including Zhejiang Geely and Great Wall Motor (GWM), relating to 4G connectivity technology. The disputes concern a patent originally developed by Panasonic and previously enforced against BYD, where injunctive pressure contributed to a licensing resolution.
• A preliminary injunction (PI) was granted against Geely by the Rio de Janeiro State Court, requiring it to cease certain uses of the patented technology (March 25, 2026 ip fray article).
• At the same time, parallel proceedings involving GWM were unfolding before different judges, also involving requests for injunctive relief based on similar 4G SEP claims.

What’s new: Recent reporting has suggested that PIs in Brazil are being overturned or avoided in disputes involving Geely and GWM. The procedural reality is more nuanced. In IP Bridge v. Geely, the injunction has been stayed by a single appellate judge pending review by a three-judge panel. In parallel GWM proceedings, a renewed request for an injunction followed procedural default. The request for an injunction had initially been deferred pending expert evidence.

Direct impact & wider ramifications: The developments underscore the importance of distinguishing between different procedural stages in Brazilian patent litigation. A stay issued by a single appellate judge does not amount to a final appellate reversal, and the ultimate position may only emerge at the panel level. At the same time, trial courts continue to grant and enforce PIs where procedural and evidentiary thresholds are met, including in SEP-related disputes. Together, these cases suggest that injunctive relief in Brazil remains a meaningful enforcement tool, but one that is closely tied to procedural posture and the timing of technical assessment.