Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 18 February 2026)

Date	18 February 2026
Court	CFI
Division	Mannheim (DE) Local Division
Type of action	Withdrawal (RoP265)
Case number(s)	UPC_CFI_819/2024;UPC_CFI_416/2025
Registry reference	UPC_CFI_819/2024 · UPC_CFI_416/2025
Parties	Corning Incorporated v. Hisense Gorenje Germany GmbH et. al.

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

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

3 October 2025 : Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 3 October 2025) UPC_CFI_819/2024 · UPC_CFI_414/2025
16 April 2026 : Corning v TCL Deutschland (CFI, UPC_CFI_819/2024, 16 April 2026) UPC_CFI_819/2024

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_CFI_819/2024 official number
UPC_CFI_416/2025 official number

Follow these proceedings

Parties

claimantCorning Incorporated11 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantHisense Gorenje Germany GmbH et. alnormalised name: Hisense Gorenje Germany GmbH. et. al2 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

14 May 2025 TCL Deutschland v Corning (CoA, 14 May 2025) Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) · appeal, first-instance number cited in the decision
La juge permanente rejette la demande de révision discrétionnaire : le refus de disjoindre l'instance contre des codéfendeurs concurrents ne constitue pas un abus du pouvoir d'appréciation, la confidentialité pouvant être assurée par la règle 262A.
3 October 2025 Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 3 October 2025) Withdrawal (RoP265) · UPC_CFI_819/2024
Le désistement de l'action à l'égard des sociétés LG et celui de leur demande reconventionnelle sont admis, les procédures se poursuivant contre Hisense et TCL, chaque partie au désistement supportant ses frais.
18 February 2026 Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 18 February 2026) Withdrawal (RoP265) · UPC_CFI_819/2024, UPC_CFI_416/2025
16 April 2026 Corning v TCL Deutschland (CFI, UPC_CFI_819/2024, 16 April 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_819/2024
La division rejette la demande reconventionnelle en nullité et retient la contrefaçon contre trois sociétés TCL : interdiction pour l'Allemagne, information, rappel, retrait, destruction et réparation depuis le 27 mai 2023, l'action est rejetée contre TCL Belgium et la publication refusée.

What the record states

Nature of the act: Withdrawal (RoP265)
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): La division locale de Mannheim autorise le désistement partiel de l'action à l'égard des deux sociétés Hisense et celui de leur demande reconventionnelle, chaque partie gardant ses frais, avec remboursement de 40 % des taxes.
Appeal: An appeal is documented in the corpus (see above).
Instance: First-instance decision, whether it has become final is not recorded.

Patents mentioned

EP 3 296 274 B1 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

Corning v TCL Deutschland (CFI, UPC_CFI_819/2024, 16 April 2026) cited in this record
Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 3 October 2025) cited in this record
VALEO SYSTEMES D’ESSUYAGE v ROBERT BOSCH DOO Beograd (CFI, 15 July 2026) cites this 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.

Patents and standards

Publication	Role in the dispute	Family	Standard and declaration	Pool	Sources
`EP 3 296 274 B1` Fining of boroalumino silicate glasses recorded proprietor: Corning Inc	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 12 other decision(s): TCL EUROPE v Corning (CFI, 24 February 2026) · Corning v TCL Deutschland (CFI, UPC_CFI_819/2024, 16 April 2026) · TCL EUROPE v Corning (CFI, 1 December 2025) · Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 3 October 2025) · TCL Europe v Corning (CFI, 8 September 2025) · Corning v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 2 July 2025) · TCL Europe v Corning (CFI, 13 June 2025) · TCL Deutschland v Corning (CoA, 14 May 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.