Opens in a new tab

APPLE (intervener) in Sun Pat v Vivo Mobile Communication (CoA, 23 September 2025)

Date23 September 2025
CourtCoA
DivisionLuxembourg (LU)
Type of actionApplication Rop313
Case number(s)UPC_CoA_757/2025
Registry referenceAPL_34967/2025 · UPC_CoA_757/2025
PartiesAPPLE Inc. (intervener) in Sun Patent Trust v. Vivo Mobile Communication Co.,Ltd., Vivo Tech GmbH, Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia SL

Summary pending review. Official UPC registry metadata imported on 24 September 2026.

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

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

Contact the firm

English summary awaiting review. Read the French case note.

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

  • UPC_CoA_757/2025 official number

Follow this case

Parties

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

Decisions in the same proceedings and documented appeals

  1. 23 September 2025 APPLE (intervener) in Sun Pat v Vivo Mobile Communication (CoA, 23 September 2025) Application Rop313 · UPC_CoA_757/2025
  2. 31 October 2025 Sun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CoA, UPC_CoA_757/2025, 31 October 2025) Generic application · UPC_CoA_757/2025
  3. 26 January 2026 Sun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CoA, 26 January 2026) Appeal RoP220.2 · UPC_CoA_757/2025

    La qualité de salarié d'une partie ne suffit pas, en elle-même, à refuser l'accès aux informations hautement confidentielles (§ 27). Exclure les salariés restreindrait fortement la liberté de la partie de choisir qui la représente et compromettrait son droit à un recours effectif et à un procès équitable (§ 27). Le rég…

What the record states

Nature of the act
Application Rop313
Appeal
Decision of the Court of Appeal.
Instance
Court of Appeal decision.

Related decisions cited in the analyses

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.

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.

Follow

Weekly summary, on Fridays.