Dolby International v HP Deutschland (CFI, 27 June 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 27 June 2024 (UPC_CFI_457/2023, ACT_590145/2023, CC_21620/2024, App_36218/2024 and App_36222/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division (presiding judge Thomas), in Dolby International AB’s infringement action on EP 3 490 258 B1 against HP Deutschland GmbH and fourteen other HP group companies, extended to 1 September 2024 the time limits for the Reply and the Defence to the counterclaim for revocation. The extension reflects the fact that, while confidentiality was pending, Dolby could not consult the staff of the HEVC pool administrator Access Advance, granted leave to intervene the day before.

Question

Should the Rule 29 RoP time limit run from access to the unredacted Statement of Defence, or be extended, where the FRAND defence concerns negotiations with a pool whose staff do not yet have access to the protected information?

Decision

An extension under Rule 9.3(a) RoP remains exceptional. Time runs from service of the Statement of Defence even where an application under Rule 262A RoP is pending, the Hamburg Local Division taking the opposite view. The party concerned may, however, obtain an extension. Where the FRAND defence deals at length with licensing negotiations with a pool, the patentee can only respond properly by consulting the pool’s staff. If the confidentiality procedure prevents this, the right to be heard justifies an extension. Although the confidentiality application covers only the non-technical part of the pleading, the extension applies to the whole of it, to avoid diverging timetables, since the hearing is not at risk at this early stage. The defendants did not comment.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: where the FRAND defence targets a pool’s offers, the patentee may obtain an extension of the whole Reply deadline until the pool’s staff have access to the protected information.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9.3, 29, 30, 262A and 313

Case law cited

Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce, Düsseldorf Local Division, 20 January 2024, Dolby v ASUS, Düsseldorf Local Division, 24 June 2024, Avago v Tesla, Hamburg Local Division, 28 November 2023, FUJIFILM v Kodak, Düsseldorf Local Division, 4 April 2024, UPC_CFI_355/2023, Mannheim Local Division, 13 June 2024, UPC_CFI_219/2023

Related decisions

• Dolby International v HP PPS Sverige, 26 June 2024, leave to intervene granted to Access Advance.

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.