Dolby International v HP PPS Sverige (CFI, 26 June 2024)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 26 June 2024 (UPC_CFI_457/2023, ACT_590145/2023, ORD_37232/2024), 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, granted Access Advance LLC, administrator of the HEVC patent pool to which Dolby contributed the patent, leave to intervene in support of the claimant. The order applies the legal interest test in a FRAND dispute.

Question

Does a patent pool administrator have a legal interest within Rule 313.1 RoP in intervening in support of the patentee, where the defendants’ FRAND defence criticises its own licence offers?

Decision

The application, lodged before the close of the written procedure, is admissible (Rule 314.2 RoP). A legal interest requires a direct and present interest in the decision sought by the supported party. An interest confined to the reasoning, or a merely indirect one, is not enough. Access Advance is entrusted with licensing the patent and the HEVC portfolio, handles Dolby’s FRAND obligations and has been negotiating a pool licence with the HP group. The defendants allege that Dolby breached its FRAND obligations, relying in part on shortcomings in those offers. Access Advance therefore has a legal interest in the defence being rejected. As the intervener is represented by Dolby’s counsel, the order arranges the exchange of documents: only redacted versions are passed on to it until the defendants’ confidentiality application is decided.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: a pool administrator may intervene in support of the patentee where the FRAND defence targets its licence offers, but access for its staff to confidential information is a matter for the Rule 262A RoP order.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 262A, 313.1, 314.2 and 315.2

Case law cited

Ocado Innovation v Autostore, Court of Appeal, 10 January 2024, Düsseldorf Local Division, 22 April 2024, UPC_CFI_363/2023, ORD_5343/2024

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.