Category: Unified Patent Court
-
UPC’s Court of Appeal: rehearings will rarely (if ever) happen, and UPC representatives MUST know EPO’s appellate case law
Context: Things have not gone well so far for Alexion Pharmaceuticals’ patent infringement actions against Amgen and Samsung Bioepis. Six months ago, the Unified Patent Court’s (UPC) Court of Appeal (CoA) affirmed (December 23, 2024 ip fray article) the Hamburg Local Division’s (LD) orders denying preliminary injunctions (PIs; officially called “provisional measures” in the UPC).…
-
Munich LD gives textbook example of how to address venue competence in UPC disputes involving multiple defendants
For the second panel of the Unified Patent Court’s Munich Local Divison, Judge-rapporteur Dr. Daniel Voß (“Voss”) has rejected a venue-related preliminary objection.
-
Samsung brings FRAND claim against ZTE in 4th jurisdiction: counterclaim in Unified Patent Court’s Mannheim Local Division
After bringing standalone FRAND/SEP actions in the UK, Germany and the United States, Samsung has now also brought a FRAND counterclaim in the UPC.
-
UPC’s Court of Appeal: defendants never have to provide collateral, not even if they bring revocation counterclaims
The UPC’s Court of Appeal considers a revocation claim merely a part of an infringement defendant’s defense and does not see a basis for requiring security.for costs.
-
UPC’s Hamburg LD enters Unitary Patent PI: defendant bears burden on invalidity; new market opportunity is irreparable harm; security not automatic
A new decision by the UPC’s Hamburg LD lays out standards that create opportunities for other patentees seeking preliminary injunctions.
-
European Patent Office aligns with Unified Patent Court on claim construction standard: Enlarged Board of Appeal decision
Today’s decision by a Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office lays out a claim construction standard that is materially consistent with that of the Unified Patent Court’s Court of Appeal.
-
UPC Dusseldorf LD affirms 10x v. Curio preliminary injunction in final ruling, creates opening for late claim construction arguments
Having recently settled its dispute with Bruker (NanoString) on presumably favorable terms, 10x is now continuing its patent enforcement with a victory over Curio.
-
UPC Roundup (1 week): new Swedish Patent Office evidence in TCL case; phased rollout of new Case Management System; various new cases
This is a summary of developments in and around the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in the week since our June 8, 2025 UPC Roundup. 1. CoA: intervener’s bid to halt enforcement of infringement ruling denied (Chainzone Technology (intervener) v. SWARCO) (link to LinkedIn post) The Court of Appeal (CoA) second panel rejected Chainzone’s application to suspend…
-
Mannheim LD assumes UPC will have to develop its own doctrine of equivalents, provides other clarifications in DISH’s 4th loss against Aylo
Context: In an “adult entertainment” industry dispute, one of DISH’s patents is in triple trouble as the Munich I Regional Court did not hold it infringed, the Unified Patent Court’s (UPC) Central Division (CD) revoked it and the Opposition Division of the Europan Patent Office (EPO) revoked it as well, meaning that DISH would need…
-
UPC Roundup (1 week): appellate rulings on sanctions, pre-June-2023 damages; alleged contravention of laws of physics; AASI cost award
This is a summary of developments in and around the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in the week since our May 31, 2025 UPC Roundup. 1. CoA: two rulings related to sanctions, one related to jurisdiction 1.1 Contempt sanctions despite subsequent compliance with injunction; electronic disclosure must be requested during proceedings on the merits (Philips v. Belkin)…