Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 22 June 2026)

Date	22 June 2026
Court	CFI
Division	Lisbon (PT) Local Division
Type of action	Infringement Action
Case number(s)	UPC_CFI_1920/2025
Registry reference	UPC-CFI-1920/2025
Parties	- ILLUMINA, INC. v. - Element Biosciences, Inc / - ‎ Element Biosciences Netherlands B.V. / - ‎ ‎I.L.C. - Instrumentos de Laboratório e Cientí…

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

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

1 April 2026 : Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 1 April 2026) UPC-CFI-00001920/2025
16 October 2026 : Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 16 October 2026) UPC-CFI-0001920/2025

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_1920/2025 official number

Follow this case

Parties

claimantINC5 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
claimantILLUMINAFollow this party
defendantElement Biosciences, Inc.3 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantInstrumentos de Laboratório e CientíFollow 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

1 April 2026 Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 1 April 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_1920/2025
La demande de rejet de l'action fondée sur la règle 361 est rejetée et le mémoire en demande corrigé remplace le mémoire initial, les défenderesses pouvant répondre sous 10 jours.
22 June 2026 Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 22 June 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_1920/2025
16 October 2026 Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 16 October 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_1920/2025
La juge rapporteure fixe la valeur de l'action en contrefaçon à 8 millions d'euros et celle de la demande reconventionnelle en nullité à 12 millions d'euros, et arrête l'organisation de l'audience du 17 décembre 2026.

What the record states

Nature of the act: Infringement Action
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): La formation instruira ensemble l’action en contrefaçon et la demande reconventionnelle en nullité. La conférence intermédiaire est fixée au 16 octobre 2026 et l’audience au 17 décembre 2026.
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 3 714 978 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 1 April 2026) cited in this record
Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 16 October 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 3 714 978`	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 2 other decision(s): Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 1 April 2026) · Illumina v Element Biosciences (CFI, 16 October 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.