Opens in a new tab

Carpmaels & Ransford v Microsoft (CoA, UPC_CoA_156/2026, 26 October 2026)

Date26 October 2026
CourtCoA
DivisionLuxembourg (LU)
Type of actionGeneric
Case number(s)UPC_CoA_156/2026
Registry referenceUPC-COA-0000156/2026
PartiesCarpmaels & Ransford LLP v. Microsoft Corporation; Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy
LanguageEnglish

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 · 1 November 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In a decision of 26 October 2026 (UPC_CoA_155/2026 and UPC_CoA_156/2026), the Court of Appeal largely grants a London law firm’s request for access to the pleadings and evidence in Suinno’s applications for rehearing against Microsoft (UPC_CoA_883/2025 and UPC_CoA_892/2025), after redaction of personal data. It excludes Exhibit C, which reproduces material declared confidential by the Paris Central Division on 8 September 2025 (UPC_CFI_724/2025, cost reimbursement proceedings); access to it may only be sought by an application under Rule 262.3 RoP. It recalls that a law firm may be a “member of the public” within the meaning of Rule 262.1(b) RoP.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure
Rules 262.1(b), 262.2, 262.3 and 262A
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR)
Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Case law cited
Ocado (Court of Appeal, UPC_CoA_404/2023, 10 April 2024), Abbott v Powell Gilbert (Court of Appeal, UPC_CoA_480/2024 and UPC_CoA_481/2024, 9 January 2025), Curio Bioscience v 10x Genomics (Court of Appeal, UPC_CoA_101/2024, 28 March 2024).

Related decisions

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, UPC Court of Appeal

Source and translations

Official source
Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
Original language
English 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_CoA_156/2026 official number

Follow this case

First instance cited in the decision: UPC_CFI_724/2025

Parties

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
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
La cour d’appel ouvre à un cabinet l’accès aux écritures des procédures de révision Suinno c. Microsoft, après occultation des données personnelles, à l’exception de la pièce C couverte par une ordonnance de confidentialité de première instance non frappée d’appel.
Appeal
Decision of the Court of Appeal (first instance cited: UPC_CFI_724/2025).
Instance
Court of Appeal decision.
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.