This is a summary of developments in and around the Unified Patent Court (UPC) in the week since our April 18, 2025 UPC Roundup. This week has been a relatively slow one at the UPC.
1. CoA on third-party access to documents: advance requests and use in other proceedings
The Court of Appeal (CoA) told third party Nicoventures that one may request access to pleadings that are scheduled to be filed between the filing of the request and the decision on it, but only if one specifies them. Blanket requests for all future documents are not permitted. Furthermore, any documents obtained by a third party from an ongoing proceeding must not be used in other fora (in this case, the European Patent Office (EPO)) until the CoA case has been decided.
2. Korean LED injunction: Paris LD
The Paris Local Division (LD) granted Seoul Viosys a permanent injunction against Photon Wave’s French distributor Laser Components, but only with respect to France as there was no showing of infringing acts in other territories. That deficiency also made the BSH request (concerning the UK) fail. The plaintiff could bring a follow-on lawsuit targeting other entities of the Laser Group, but that would also be an opportunity for the defending side to challenge the patent-in-suit in time. Last time, the defendant itself did not bring a revocation counterclaim and the intervenor (Photon Wave) was denied the right to pursue the revocation of the patent-in-suit. It looks like this will go through another round or more of litigation before we know who really won (and to what extent).
3. Mannheim LD’s exemplary hearing preparation
The Mannheim LD continues to impress practitioners and litigation watchers with its meticulous, foresightful and transparent hearing preparation (latest example: DISH & Sling TV v. Aylo).
4. Involvement of multiple attorneys not tantamount to cost inflation: Dusseldorf LD
In the Ortovox v. Mammut case that gave rise to the UPC’s first-ever preliminary injunction (formally, “provisional measures”) to be upheld by the CoA (see item 1 of our September 27, 2024 UPC Roundup), the Dusseldorf LD decided to award costs after the PI proceedings, though there will be a final cost decision after the main proceedings. The court held that getting multiple attorneys involved does not per se constitute cost inflation, particularly not if there is a division of labor, such as between attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. Also, confidential information between a party and its counsel is protected.
5. Validity issues facing Atlas Global’s WiFi patents: Dusseldorf LD
The Dusseldorf LD stayed a couple of Atlas Global cases (one against Vantiva, one against TP-Link), and we have found out that there are non-binding preliminary opinions that have cast serious doubt on the validity of the patents-in-suit. The same has also recently happened to two patents Atlas is asserting in Germany.
6. Data provided on USB stick accompanying pleadings: Dusseldorf LD
In Rädlinger v. Henle, the defendant provided a USB stick along with its answer to the complaint, but plaintiff’s counsel received it only with a couple of weeks of delay. Given that the information on the USB stick was relevant, the court granted an extension of time for the reply brief.
7. First-ever wrongful-enforcement damages hearing in September: Munich LD
In 10x Genomics v. Bruker (the acquirer of NanoString’s assets), the Munich LD has scheduled a wrongful-enforcement damages hearing for September 17 and, if necessary, September 18. This relates to a PI that was awarded in 2023 but overturned by the CoA in 2024. The patent has meanwhile been upheld in an amended form, and the related main proceedings (on infringement) will be held just prior to the wrongful-enforcement damages hearing.
8. UPC hiring more judges
Until May 2, 2025, there is an opportunity to apply to become a legally qualified judge at the CoA or to be “placed on the reserve list of appointable legally qualified judges.”
9. Recent and upcoming hearings
There were no hearings this week.
Upcoming hearings:
- Wednesday, May 7, 2025:
- DISH Technologies L.L.C. and others v. AYLO PREMIUM LTD and others (Mannheim LD)
- Monday, May 12, 2025:
- ILME GmbH Elektrotechnische Handelsgesellschaft, Industria Lombarda Materiale Elettrico I.L.M.E. S.p.A. v. PHOENIX CONTACT GmbH & Co. KG and XSYS Germany GmbH, XSYS Prepress N.V., XSYS Italia S.r.l. v. Esko-Graphics Imaging GmbH (CoA, two Rule 220.2 RoP appeals heard jointly)
- Tuesday, May 13, 2025:
- Tiroler Rohre GmbH v. SSAB Swedish Steel GmbH and SSAB Europe Oy (Munich LD)
- 10x Genomics v. Curio Bioscience (Dusseldorf LD)
- Wednesday, May 14, 2025:
- Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc., Luxendo GmbH, Bruker Nederland B.V v. 10X Genomics, Inc., President and Fellows of Harvard College (CoA, Rule 220.2RoP appeal)
- Steros GPA Innovative S. L. v. OTEC Präzisionsfinish GmbH (Hamburg LD)
- Tuesday, May 20, 2025:
- Headwater Research LLC v. Samsung Electronics GmbH (Munich LD)
- Thursday, May 22, 2025:
- Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH, Sanofi-Aventis Groupe S.A. and Sanofi Winthrop Industrie S.A. and Amgen, Inc. v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. (CoA, Rule 220.1(a) RoP appeals)
- Nera Innovations Ltd. v. Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd. (Hamburg LD)