Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, 2 October 2026)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 2 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_2660/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division authorised Micron Technology to serve its statement of claim for infringement (EP 3 574 526) on Lexar Europe, the second defendant, established in the Netherlands, through a Dutch bailiff, at Micron’s expense. The ordinary routes had failed: the Court’s registered letters were not collected and were returned, and Lexar’s known representative refused to accept service. The order offers a practical answer to a European defendant that does not collect its mail.

Question

May a claimant, once the methods of service under Rules 270 to 274 RoP have failed, be permitted to serve through a bailiff in another Member State?

Decision

Since service under Rules 270 to 274 RoP was impossible on the information available, there was good reason to authorise an alternative method under Rule 275.1 RoP. Article 20(1) of Regulation (EU) 2020/1784 allows any interested person to effect service directly through the judicial officers of the Member State addressed where its law permits. As Dutch bailiffs serve in person and record service, that method was permitted.

Key points for practice

• Failure to collect registered mail and counsel’s refusal to accept service open the way to Rule 275 RoP, here combined with the EU Service Regulation.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 270 to 274, 271.4(a) and 275.1

Other provisions

Regulation (EU) 2020/1784, Arts 18 and 20

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.