UPC Lisbon LD: ASUS owes Ericsson damages for six years of infringing semiconductor patent in eight countries; PI was denied in 2024

Context:

• Litigation between Ericsson and ASUS is pending in different venues, including a couple of Unified Patent Court (UPC) divisions. In the fall of 2024, the UPC’s Lisbon Local Division (LD) denied Ericsson provisional measures (the UPC term for a preliminary injunction (PI)) over a semiconductor patent (October 15, 2024 ip fray article). The patent (EP2819131 on an “inductor layout for reduced VCO coupling”) was considered to be likely valid and infringed, but the court did not find that Ericsson satisfied the urgency requirement.
• The patent expired on February 15, 2025. Four months was not a sufficient window for an appeal of the PI denial. But Ericsson pursued this patent assertion in the main proceedings.
• In the Milan LD, Ericsson is suing ASUS over two patents, and those cases have were filed almost two years ago but still months away from trial (April 11, 2026 ip fray article), an indefensible delay that is not representative of all “smaller” UPC divisions, but a lost opportunity to achieve a more balanced docket distribution. Ericsson brought PI motions this year. A hearing will be held on Friday (May 8, 2026) by video.

What’s new: Today the Lisbon LD rendered its judgment, upholding the patent in a slightly amended form and holding ASUS liable for damages for approximately six years preceding the expiration of the patent. The covered countries are Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden.

Direct impact: In the next step, ASUS will have to provide information to Ericsson, enabling the calculation of a damages claim. Absent a settlement, the exact damages amount will have to be determined in a subsequent proceeding.

Wider ramifications: The Lisbon LD is considered by many practitioners to have more potential than the number of cases filed there to date suggests. Other litigants may view the fact that Ericsson prevailed on the merits as encouraging. Each of the three legally qualified judges on the panel presides over a “small” UPC LD.