Decisions of the Unified Patent Court recorded under "Application Rop 333" in UPC Litigation Watch, the case law database maintained by Dhenne Avocats.
UPC decisions and orders since 1 June 2023. “Decision with commentary” means the entry contains an analysis by Dhenne Avocats. “Summary available” identifies a summary; “Reference” identifies a record without a detailed case note. Open the entry for the source and, where available, the facts, reasoning and practical implications. The official decision is authoritative.
Combinable filters, search within the records or the full text of the decisions, copy reference, selection and export. The keyword and reference search above remains available.
38 decisions recorded
By an order of 12 October 2026, the Munich Local Division, sitting with a technically qualified judge, rejected as out of time a request for review under Rule 333 RoP against point 6 of its order of 15 September 2026.
Read the analysisIn an order of 3 July 2026, given in joined appeal proceedings UPC_CoA_302/2025 and UPC_CoA_305/2025, the Court of Appeal rejects Rematec's application under Rule 333 for review of the judge-rapporteur's order of 30 March 2026.
Read the analysisBy an order of 12 November 2025, given in the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_837/2024, UPC_CFI_349/2025 and UPC_CFI_394/2025 (EP 2 728 089), the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed the request by Surftown, WhiteWater Era, WhiteWater West Industries and Endless Surf for review…
Read the analysisIn an order of 14 October 2025, given in proceedings UPC_CFI_807/2024 and UPC_CFI_334/2025, the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division upheld the judge-rapporteur's order of 29 August 2025: Wonderland Nurserygoods may extend, in its reply, its equivalence case to features 1.9 and…
Read the analysisIn an order of 13 October 2025, given in joined proceedings UPC_CFI_100/2024 and UPC_CFI_411/2024 (patent EP 2 263 098), the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Ona Patents' request under Rule 333 for review of the summons to the oral hearing…
Read the analysisIn an order of 2 October 2025 (UPC_CFI_636/2025), the Mannheim Local Division, on a request for panel review under Rule 333, confirmed the judge-rapporteur's order of 25 July 2025 refusing to impose penalties on Palo Alto Networks for non-compliance with a saisie…
Read the analysisBy an order of 12 September 2025 (UPC_CFI_132/2024, App_20197/2025), the Mannheim Local Division dismissed Total Semiconductor's request for panel review (Rule 333) of the judge-rapporteur's order of 11 April 2025 requiring it to provide EUR 600,000 security for costs in its infringement…
Read the analysisBy order of 27 June 2025, the Munich Local Division (Zigann, Zana, Pichlmaier, Wagner), on Zentiva's application for panel review under Rule 333, confirmed the judge rapporteur's case management order of 8 May 2025 in Sanofi's action on EP 2 493 466…
Read the analysisBy an order of 20 June 2025 (UPC_CFI_319/2024 and UPC_CFI_728/2024), the Milan Local Division, on Ericsson's application for panel review under Rule 333, upheld the judge-rapporteur's refusal to set up an "external eyes only" confidentiality regime in Ericsson's infringement action against ASUSTEK…
Read the analysisBy an order of 20 June 2025 (actions UPC CFI 318/2024 and 730/2024, EP 2 727 242), the Milan Local Division (Judges Perrotti, presiding, Zana, rapporteur, Lopes and Norrenbrock, technically qualified judge) dismissed Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson's application for panel review of the…
Read the analysisBy order of 22 May 2025, the panel of the Mannheim Local Division dismissed Total Semiconductor's application for review (Rule 333) of the judge rapporteur's order of 1 April 2025, which had refused it leave to file a further written pleading in…
Read the analysisOn a request for panel review (Rule 333), the Hamburg Local Division upheld the judge rapporteur's refusal of the application for security for costs brought by Chint New Energy Technology and the Astronergy companies against JingAo Solar, the Chinese claimant in the…
Read the analysisBy a joint order of 25 February 2025 (UPC_CFI_220/2023 and UPC_CFI_221/2023), the panel of the Munich Local Division upheld the judge-rapporteur's orders of 23 and 24 December 2024 which, after Panasonic withdrew its infringement actions (EP 3 024 163) against Xiaomi and…
Read the analysisBy a revised order of 13 January 2025 (UPC_CFI_298/2023), panel 1 of the Munich Local Division, on the application of President and Fellows of Harvard College (claimant 2, alongside 10x Genomics, against NanoString Technologies), modified the judge-rapporteur's order of 14 October 2024.
Read the analysisBy an order of 27 December 2024 (UPC_CFI_164/2024, ORD_62910/2024), the Paris Central Division (Judge Catallozzi presiding and acting as judge-rapporteur) rejected Suinno's request to reduce from EUR 300,000 to EUR 100,000 the security for costs ordered on 27 September 2024 (ORD_45914/2024) in…
Read the analysisBy order of 2 December 2024 (UPC_CFI_114/2024 and UPC_CFI_448/2024, ACT_13227/2024, CC_43919/2024), the Munich Local Division, on Heraeus Electronics' application for panel review under Rule 333, set aside the judge-rapporteur's order of 25 September 2024: extending the infringement action on EP 3 215…
Read the analysisBy order of 25 November 2024 (UPC_CFI_355/2023, ACT_578607/2023, App_61143/2024), the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division (presided over by R.
Read the analysisBy order of 11 October 2024 (UPC_CFI_169/2024, ACT_19012/2024, ORD_51859/2024), the panel of the Hamburg Local Division (S. Klepsch, presiding, S.
Read the analysisBy an order of 24 September 2024 (UPC_CFI_380/2024), the panel of the Milan Central Division (A. Postiglione, presiding judge and judge-rapporteur, A.-L.
Read the analysisBy an order of 16 September 2024 (UPC_CFI_164/2024, ACT_18406/2024, App_40799/2024, ORD_41174/2024), panel 2 of the Paris Central Division (P. Catallozzi, presiding judge and judge-rapporteur, T.
Read the analysisBy order of 16 September 2024 (ORD_43015/2024, UPC_CFI_164/2024), the Paris Central Division rejected Microsoft's request for a panel review of the judge-rapporteur's order of 2 July 2024, which had refused to dismiss as manifestly inadmissible the action for infringement of EP 2…
Read the analysisBy order of 9 September 2024 (UPC_CFI_219/2023 and UPC_CFI_223/2023, App_45837/2024 and App_45833/2024), the panel of the Mannheim Local Division (P. Tochtermann, presiding, D.
Read the analysisBy order of 6 September 2024 (UPC_CFI_373/2023, ACT_580849/2023, App_47922/2024), the panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division (Judge Thomas, presiding, B. Thom, judge-rapporteur, A.
Read the analysisBy order of 12 August 2024 (UPC_CFI_153/2024, ACT_16417/2024, ORD_42985/2024), the panel of the Munich Local Division (U. Voß, presiding, D. Voß, A.
Read the analysisBy order of 22 July 2024 (UPC_CFI_471/2023, ACT_594191/2023, ORD_42880/2024), the Mannheim Local Division (P. Tochtermann, presiding, D.
Read the analysisBy order of 1 May 2024 (UPC_CoA_183/2024), the panel of the Court of Appeal, on Daedalus Prime's request for review under Rule 333 RoP, confirmed the judge-rapporteur's order of 29 April 2024 refusing to extend the time limit for lodging the statement…
Read the analysisBy an order of 30 April 2024 (UPC_CFI_263/2023, ACT_555899/2023, App_20743/2024), the Paris Central Division (F. Thomas, P. Catallozzi, U.
Read the analysisBy order of 11 January 2024 (UPC_CoA_486/2023, App_595643/2023), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal granted Netgear's application for discretionary review and gave it leave to appeal the order of the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division of 11 December 2023,…
Read the analysisBy an order of 22 October 2024 (UPC_CFI_22/2023, ACT_460565/2023, ORD_49705/2024), the Hamburg Local Division (S. Klepsch, presiding judge and judge-rapporteur, S.
Read the analysis