Maxell v Samsung Electronics (CFI, 10 December 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In Maxell’s infringement action against Samsung on EP 2 061 230 and the counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_251/2025 and UPC_CFI_769/2025), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division refuses Samsung a six-week extension of its time limit and admits the 44 auxiliary requests filed by Maxell in its conditional application to amend. The order shows that a high number of auxiliary requests may be reasonable where it answers an exceptional number of novelty attacks, and that the ordinary complexity of a case does not warrant an extension.

Question

Does the filing of 44 auxiliary requests justify limiting their number or granting the counterclaimant an extension of time under Rule 9.3(a) RoP?

Decision

The application for an extension is admissible (paragraph 9), but the power to depart from the time periods of the Rules is to be used with caution and only in justified exceptional cases (paragraph 10), which the circumstances relied on are not (paragraph 11). Forty-four requests are reasonable: they introduce only twelve new features and respond to an exceptionally large number of novelty attacks, and Samsung did not identify any specific request as unreasonable (paragraphs 12 to 14). The case, though complex, is not exceptional, overlaps with parallel proceedings before the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_665/2025), and Samsung has a complete combined exhibit despite upload defects (paragraphs 15 to 17). The time limit remains 12 January 2026 (paragraph 18).

Key points for practice

• Whether auxiliary requests are reasonable in number (Rule 30.1(c) RoP) depends on the number of genuinely new features and on the invalidity attacks they answer (paragraphs 12 and 13).
• An extension of time requires exceptional circumstances. The usual complexity of UPC litigation is not enough (paragraphs 10, 11 and 15).

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9.3, 30.1 and 333

Related decisions

• Maxell v Samsung Electronics, 10 April 2026, later order of the judge-rapporteur following the interim conference.
• Maxell v Samsung Electronics, 10 August 2026, decision on the merits.

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.