JingAo Solar v Chint New Energy Technology (CFI, 31 March 2025)

Date	31 March 2025
Court	CFI
Division	Munich (DE) Local Division
Type of action	Amend Document
Registry reference	App_7618/2025 · ORD_8454/2025
Parties	JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.

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 · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 31 March 2025 (UPC_CFI_425/2024, ACT_42211/2024), the Munich Local Division (Judges Zigann, presiding, Rinkinen, Pichlmaier, rapporteur, and Checcacci, technically qualified) granted JingAo Solar leave under Rule 263 to change its claim for an injunction against Chint New Energy Technology and five Astronergy and Chint companies in its infringement action on EP 2 787 541: adding features of dependent claims 2, 3, 4, 9 and 10, aligning claim 13 with the decision of the EPO Opposition Division and extending the claim to the ASTRO N8 Bifacial series. The time limit for the rejoinder was extended to 14 June 2025.

Question

May a patentee adapt its infringement claim to auxiliary requests unrelated to the invalidity grounds raised, to a claim amended by the EPO and to a product launched after the action was filed?

Decision

Rule 30 does not confine an application to amend the patent to amendments tied to the grounds of the counterclaim: its purpose is to let the patentee save the patent in amended form, and the patentee must be able to adapt its infringement claim, failing which it could not assert the amended version. The claimant was entitled to await the Opposition Division’s decision, since the synchronisation of proceedings reflected in Rule 295(a) presupposes that claims amended by the EPO can be brought into UPC proceedings. The ASTRO N8 product, which came to light after the action was filed, could be added in the reply after a reasonable period of assessment, and the extension granted to the defendants safeguards their position.

Key points for practice

Practical point: auxiliary requests under Rule 30 justify a parallel change to the infringement claim, and a patentee may await the outcome of the opposition before aligning the claims asserted.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure: Rules 30.1(b), 263 and 295(a)
Case law cited: No UPC decision is cited.

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.

Going further

Lexicon: Written procedure (UPC), Court fees and costs (UPC).

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

No case number recorded in this record.

Parties

claimantJingAo Solar Co., Ltd.3 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

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: Amend Document
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): La modification de la demande est autorisée pour les trois motifs invoqués (requêtes subsidiaires de la règle 30, revendication modifiée par l'OEB, nouveau produit) et le délai de duplique est prorogé.
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 2 787 541 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

JingAo Solar v Chint New Energy (CFI, 28 November 2025) 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 2 787 541`	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 4 other decision(s): JingAo Solar v Chint New Energy (CFI, 28 November 2025) · Chint New Energy v JingAo Solar (CoA, 9 July 2025) · Chint New Energy v JingAo Solar (CoA, 20 May 2025) · Chint New Energy Technology v JingAo Solar (CFI, 19 March 2025)	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.