Context: Atlas Global is enforcing WiFi patents acquired from Newracom, an ETRI spinoff, against various device makers in the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and in Germany. Last summer, the Oberlandesgericht München (Munich Higher Regional Court) raised the amount of collateral required for enforcement for €4 million to €26 million in an Atlas v. TP-Link case (August 20, 2024 ip fray article). In the same litigation, the Bundespatentgericht (Federal Patent Court of Germany) had not provided its preliminary non-binding opinion on (in)validity in time for the infringement ruling (May 22, 2024 ip fray article). An Atlas v. Vantiva case has recently been stayed by the UPC (see item 10 of our April 28, 2025 UPC Roundup).
What’s new: Yesterday the UPC’s Dusseldorf Local Division (LD) stayed an Atlas v. TP-Link case (PDF (in German)). We’ve conducted some further research and found out that four of Atlas Global’s patents-in-suit are deemed invalid on a preliminary and non-binding basis: two by the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office (EPO), and two by the Federal Patent Court of Germany. And a fifth was revoked last year on a definitive basis by a Board of Appeal (BoA).
Direct impact: Even after preliminary non-binding opinions that suggest invalidation, patents are sometimes salvaged, such as in an amended form. But there is major invalidation pressure on this portfolio, and this enforcement campaign is at risk of becoming a major failure. By comparison, the WiFi 6 patents Huawei asserted against Amazon, AVM and Netgear achieved far better results (and Amazon did not even challenge the validity of one of them).
Wider ramifications: Atlas placed a bet on gaining decisive leverage, particularly by suing in the Landgericht München I (Munich I Regional Court), but is now facing stiff resistance. Should Vantiva and TP-Link manage to fend off Atlas’s campaign in its entirety, that would be a rare situation of a campaign involving multiple standard-essential patents (SEPs) failing to result in license agreements. There is also a possibility now of Atlas having to settle at a far lower rate than it originally hoped. Whatever the outcome, it has already been proven, particularly but not only by TP-Link, that sometimes it is possible for defendants to achieve significant results even when they get sued in Munich. This is, however, separate from the question of whether implementers of standards have much of a chance of prevailing on a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing) defense.
1. EP’901: UPC case against Vantiva stayed after negative preliminary opinion from EPO
On April 17, 2025, the Dusseldorf LD stayed an Atlas v. Vantiva case (PDF (in German)) as per a joint stipulation of the parties.
The patent-in-suit, EP3353901 (“Apparatus and method for scrambling control field information for wireless communications”), is being opposed by both Vantiva (a French company whose history harks back to Technicolor) and TP-Link. An opposition hearing will be held on July 10 and 11, 2025. In preparation of that hearing, the opposition panel has expressed the view that Atlas makes valid points on disclosure and the priority date, but finds all independent claims to have been anticipated by a prior art reference. None of Atlas’s eight auxiliary requests is considered likely to succeed either.
The stay is almost certainly attributable to that preliminary non-binding opinion.
2. EP’937: UPC case against TP-Link stayed
Yesterday (April 22, 2025), the Dusseldorf LD also stayed an Atlas v. TP-Link case (PDF (in German)) as per a joint stipulation.
The patent-in-suit, EP3186937 (“Frame transmitting method and frame receiving method”), is also in trouble in the EPO. In April, the Opposition Division stated its preliminary view that the patent is invalid as granted, and that the auxiliary requests to amend the patent are all inadmissible. The opposition hearing is slated for November 11-13, 2025.
3. EP’571 (over which an injunction was ordered against TP-Link): invalid in Federal Patent Court’s preliminary opinion
Further above, the Atlas v. TP-Link case in which the Federal Patent Court came quite late with its preliminary non-binding opinion was already mentioned. The relevant patent is EP3295571 (title: “pilot transmission and reception for orthogonal frequency division multiple access”).
After the injunction came down, the Federal Patent Court was apparently still taking its time, but in February it finally rendered its preliminary non-binding opinion and it’s negative for the patent.
On this basis, the injunction is never going to be actually enforced unless the patent gets upheld, which would require the Federal Patent Court to change its stance, or Atlas to prevail on appeal to the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice).
4. EP’140: failure on both fronts
Last June, Atlas withdrew its complaint against TP-Link over EP3363140 (“Protection methods for wireless transmissions”) shortly before trial, suggesting that a finding of non-infringement was on the horizon. Last month, the Federal Patent Court handed down a preliminary non-binding opinion according to which the patent is invalid as granted and the proposed amendments lack support in the specification. The nullity hearing will take place on October 14, 2025.
5. EP’857: complete destruction on appeal
EP3286857 (“Preamble and payload for high efficiency (he) transmission”) was declared invalid on a definitive, non-appealable basis by an EPO BoA on June 17, 2024. The opponents included Acer, ASUS, TP-Link, HP and Dell.
A Munich case against TP-Link was withdrawn on that same day. There was no way Atlas could have won that one anymore.
6. Counsel
The following representatives are listed in the two recent UPC orders to stay:
Counsel for Atlas Global (who are more successful on other clients’ behalf and may just have the problem that this client’s patents are not as strong as the portfolios of some other SEP holders): Wildanger Kehrwald Graf von Schwerin & Partner’s Jasper Meyer zu Riemsloh, Peter-Michael Weisse and Dr. Alexander Wiese; and Bosch Jehle patent attorneys Dr. Thomas Hell and Dr. Rudolf Reichold.
Counsel for TP-Link (in five cases brought by Atlas Global): Clifford Chance’s Dr. Tobias Hessel.
Counsel for Vantiva: Meissner Bolte attorneys-at-law Andreas Kabisch, Moritz-Melchior Bloser and Niels Christof Schuh, and patent attorneys Julian Wuermser (“Würmser” in German) and Florian Meyer.