NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard College (CFI, 3 January 2025)

Date	3 January 2025
Court	CFI
Division	Munich (DE) Central Division - Section
Type of action	Application RoP262.1 (b)
Registry reference	App_61570/2024 · ORD_62447/2024
Parties	Berggren Oy

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 3 January 2025 (UPC_CFI_252/2023), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Central Division (Judge Kupecz) granted Berggren Oy access to the written pleadings and evidence in NanoString Technologies Europe’s revocation action against President and Fellows of Harvard College (EP2794928), which ended with a final decision on 17 October 2024. Access is given after redaction of personal data. The order applies the presumption in favour of access once proceedings have ended.

Question

May a third party obtain access to the pleadings and evidence of a concluded revocation action simply to understand the reasoning of the decision?

Decision

The request was reasoned within Rule 262.1(b): it identified the documents, stated its purpose and explained why access was needed, in line with the Court of Appeal’s order in Ocado v Autostore (section 1). The UPCA starts from public access to the register and open proceedings, unless an overriding confidentiality interest, personal data protection or the general interest of justice or public order prevails. After a final decision, the public generally has an interest in access, which helps understanding of the decision and trust in the Court. The parties, invited to comment, raised nothing (section 2). Access was therefore granted, subject to redaction of personal data within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

Key points for practice

Practical point: once proceedings have ended, a party wishing to protect particular documents must say so when the Court invites comments on an access request, silence leads to access.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court: Art. 10, Art. 45 and Art. 73(2)(b)
Rules of Procedure: Rules 220.2, 224.1(b), 262.1(a) and 262.1(b)
Regulation (EU) 2016/679: General Data Protection Regulation
Case law cited: Ocado Innovation v Autostore, Court of Appeal, 10 April 2024 (paragraph 44)

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), Confidentiality club.

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

claimantBerggren OyFollow 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: Application RoP262.1 (b)
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): Le juge rapporteur accorde au tiers l'accès aux mémoires et pièces de l'action en nullité close, après occultation des données personnelles.
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 2 794 928 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

Ocado Innovation v Autostore (CoA, 10 April 2024) cited in this record

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 2 794 928` Compositions and methods for analyte detection recorded proprietor: Harvard University	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 8 other decision(s): NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · President and Fellows of Harvard College v NanoString Technologies Eur · NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · NanoString Technologies Europe v President and Fellows of Harvard Coll · NanoString v President and Fellows of Harvard College (CFI, 25 July 20	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.