Context: The first Unified Patent Court (UPC) litigant to have both won and fended off injunctions was Abbott. It defended against some cases brought by Dexcom (see, e.g., July 4, 2024 ip fray article), and it has obtained provisional measures (preliminary injunctions (PIs)) (see, e.g., February 6, 2026 ip fray article). Abbott likes quick wins, so it has yet to win a permanent UPC injunction or to defend one of its patent against any kind of UPC revocation action, however.
What’s new: Yesterday, the UPC’s Hague Local Division (LD) handed down (PDF) its final judgment in Advanced Brain Monitoring v. Philips. The accused functionality serves to help sleep apnoe patients by identifying a supine (lying on the back) sleep pattern, which is disadvantageous given their condition. The patent-in-suit was revoked. Independent claim 1 and an auxiliary request importing a feature of claim 2 were fully anticipated by a Japanese patent application from 1991, and another auxiliary request (relating to claim 4) lacked an inventive step when combining the same prior art reference with general knowledge as evidenced by a book. Philips had already opposed the grant of the patent by the European Patent Office (EPO), but Advanced Brain Monitoring prevailed before a Technical Board of Appeal. As a result of the UPC’s revocation decision, the infringement case has been dismissed.
Direct impact: Advanced Brain Monitoring will presumably appeal. For the original claims 1 and 2, that will be an uphill battle given that non-novelty is the worst outcome. For claim 4, the case may be a little bit closer. Should at least one claim be revived, the UPC’s Court of Appeal (CoA) would typically also enter an infringement ruling (February 18, 2026 ip fray article).
Wider ramifications: Philips has now joined Abbott in securing and fending off UPC injunctions, even in the combination of fending off permanent injunctions (now against Advanced Brain Monitoring) while winning a preliminary one (against a rival toothbrush maker: September 16, 2024 ip fray article). But with yesterday’s defensive win, Philips was also first to achieve the following two combinations in the UPC:
- first to have fended off (yesterday) and obtained (see, e.g., Februrary 12, 2026 ip fray article on what was also the UPC’s first-ever bench ruling in a main proceedings infringement action) permanent injunctions
- first to have prevailed on (yesterday) and fended off (such as in the case referenced in the previous bullet point) against revocation (counter)claims
Court and counsel
Panel: Presiding Judge Edger Brinkman, Judge-rapporteur Margot Kokke, Judge Stefan Johansson (Stockholm, Sweden), and Technically Qualified Judge Dr. Stefanie Philipps.
Counsel for Advanced Brain Monitoring (who successfully represented Abbott in its UPC cases mentioned further above, thereby becoming the first counsel to have obtained and fended off injunctions on behalf of the same client): Taylor Wessing’s (ip fray firm profile with numerous achievements coming soon) Prof. Wim Maas, Faziel Abdul, and Naomi Kannekens.
Counsel for Philips and its Respironics subsidiary: The decision lists Philips in-house counsel Michael Ras, Hendrik Pastink, Arie Jan Willem Tol, and Ceren Okat, as well Hoyng Rokh Monegier’s (ip fray firm profile) Roeland Grijpink. Yesterday’s outcome earns Hoyng Rokh Monegier two more achievements in our UPC law firm directory.