CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, UPC_CFI_672/2026, 26 October 2026)

Date	26 October 2026
Court	CFI
Division	Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division
Type of action	Infringement Action
Case number(s)	UPC_CFI_672/2026; UPC_CFI_2175/2026
Registry reference	UPC-CFI-0000672/2026
Parties	CA, Inc. v. Deutsche Telekom AG; T-Systems International GmbH; Telekom Deutschland GmbH
Language	German

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

15 July 2026 : CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, 15 July 2026) UPC-CFI-0000672/2026

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

Contact the firm

Dhenne Avocats · 1 November 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In a procedural order of 26 October 2026, issued in German (UPC_CFI_672/2026 and UPC_CFI_2175/2026, EP 1 934 794 B1), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division classifies as confidential the highlighted information in the defendants’ rejoinder of 19 October 2026 and its annexes B 17 and B 20. On the claimant’s side, access is restricted to its representatives and three in-house IP counsel. Granting CA’s request for clarification, he specifies that this restriction only covers newly introduced information: information already disclosed remains governed by the order of 15 July 2026. There is no reason to grant leave to appeal, which no party requested, as the order is in line with Court of Appeal case law.

Provisions applied

UPC Agreement: Article 58
Rules of Procedure: Rules 262.2 and 262A

Related decisions

Düsseldorf Local Division, 15 July 2026, UPC_CFI_672/2026, CA v Deutsche Telekom: confidentiality order.

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 1 November 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.

Going further

Lexicon: Confidentiality club

Source and translations

Official source: Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
Original language: German from the language of proceedings
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_CFI_672/2026 official number
UPC_CFI_2175/2026 official number

Follow these proceedings

Parties

claimantCA, Inc.3 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantDeutsche Telekom AG3 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantTelekom Deutschland GmbH3 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantT-Systems International GmbH2 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

15 July 2026 CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, 15 July 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_672/2026
Les chiffres d'affaires, l'infrastructure et l'organisation interne des données sont protégés, mais pas les noms et informations des clients, rendus publics par ceux-ci.
26 October 2026 CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, UPC_CFI_672/2026, 26 October 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_672/2026, UPC_CFI_2175/2026

What the record states

Nature of the act: Infringement Action
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): Le juge-rapporteur de la division locale de Düsseldorf protège les nouvelles informations confidentielles de la duplique des défenderesses et en réserve l’accès, côté demanderesse, aux représentants et à trois juristes internes, en précisant que cette restriction ne vaut que pour les informations nouvellement introduites.
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 1 934 794 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, 15 July 2026) 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 1 934 794`	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 1 other decision(s): CA v Deutsche Telekom (CFI, 15 July 2026)	not recorded	not recorded	not recorded	Espacenet links not checked 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.