KEEEX v Adobe Systems Software Ireland (CFI, 8 September 2025)

Date	8 September 2025
Court	CFI
Division	Paris (FR) Local Division
Type of action	Generic application
Registry reference	App_35040/2025 · ORD_36346/2025
Parties	ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LIMITED

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.

Contact the firm

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 8 September 2025 (UPC_CFI_530/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division, ruling on applications by Adobe, OpenAI and Truepic in the infringement action brought by KEEEX against eight defendants on European patent EP 2 949 070, aligned the starting point of the time limits for all defendants on 4 September 2025 and, exceptionally, extended the time limits for the preliminary objection and the statement of defence by four weeks rather than the three months sought. The order shows how the division handles staggered service in a multi-defendant action.

Question

Where several defendants have been served on different dates, may the starting point of the time limits be unified and those time limits extended by three months?

Decision

Alignment was granted and the extension reduced. The proper administration of justice requires the exchange of pleadings to run from the same date for all defendants, an alignment the parties had agreed at the case management meeting of 5 September 2025. A four-week extension was found proportionate in view of the length of the statement of claim (150 pages), the exhibits, the technical complexity and an economic stake limited to a possible request for an interim award, KEEEX having agreed that damages would be determined in separate proceedings (Rule 125). The defendants are to file any preliminary objection by 3 November 2025 and their statement of defence by 2 January 2026.

Key points for practice

Practical point: in an action against several defendants served on different dates, a request to align time limits is likely to succeed, a long extension must be justified by the size and complexity of the case.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure: Rules 9.3, 19, 23, 125 and 333, and Preamble

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 10 October 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.

Going further

Lexicon: Written procedure (UPC), Court fees and costs (UPC).

Source and translations

Official source: Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
Original language: not recorded
Translation available: no translation recorded the firm’s French record is a summary, not a translation
Date checked: not recorded

Only the official text is authoritative. A machine translation is never presented as official, republishing a third-party document requires a verified basis in rights, and a link to the source is preferred.

Follow this case

Proceedings, related decisions, appeals, parties and patents as recorded in the registry and in the Dhenne Avocats corpus. Each link states its source.

Proceedings

No case number recorded in this record.

Parties

claimantADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND LIMITED12 decisions in the corpus Follow this party

Exact name as it appears in the record, group affiliation only where sourced and dated.

Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals

No other decision in the corpus bears the same case number, and no appeal is documented in the corpus to date.

What the record states

Nature of the act: Generic application
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): Le point de départ des délais est aligné au 4 septembre 2025 pour tous les défendeurs et les délais d'exception préliminaire et de défense sont prorogés de quatre semaines.
Appeal: No appeal documented in the corpus, this does not mean that no appeal was lodged.
Instance: First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.

Patents mentioned

EP 2 949 070 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Scope: Dhenne Avocats corpus. Registry-based links are marked “official number”; links derived from the analyses are marked as such. An erroneous link can be withdrawn without deleting any record.

Patents and standards

Publication	Role in the dispute	Family	Standard and declaration	Pool	Sources
`EP 2 949 070` Verification process of the integrity of numerical data bloc recorded proprietor: Aix-Marseille Université et Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 8 other decision(s): Adobe v Keeex (CoA, 13 March 2026) · KEEEX v ADOBE (CFI, 29 July 2026) · Adobe v KEEEX (CoA, 10 July 2026) · KEEEX v Adobe Systems Software Ireland (CFI, 25 June 2026) · KEEEX v ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND (CFI, 1 June 2026) · ADOBE v KEEEX (CoA, 8 May 2026) · Adobe v KEEEX (CoA, 30 April 2026) · KEEEX v ADOBE SYSTEMS SOFTWARE IRELAND (CFI, 27 November 2025)	not recorded	not recorded	not recorded	Espacenet · European Patent Register existence and title of the publication checked on 30 October 2026 (Google Patents, Espacenet and Register links are not checked automatically) mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis

The statuses “asserted in litigation”, “declared essential”, “listed by a pool” and “essentiality examined by a court” are distinct and may coexist. Validity, infringement and technical essentiality are different questions. Scope: patents cited in the decisions of the Dhenne Avocats corpus, with no essentiality score or prediction.

Receive an alert

Weekly summary of new records and substantive updates matching what you follow. Address confirmed by email, unsubscribe at any time, one email per week even where several of your follows match.