Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, UPC_CFI_2660/2026, 30 October 2026)

Date	30 October 2026
Court	CFI
Division	Düsseldorf (DE) Local Division
Type of action	Infringement Action
Case number(s)	UPC_CFI_2660/2026
Registry reference	UPC-CFI-0002660/2026
Parties	Micron Technology, Inc. v. Ultron AG; Lexar Europe B.V.; Apacer Technology B.V.
Language	English

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

2 October 2026 : Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, 2 October 2026) UPC-CFI-0002660/2026

Dhenne Avocats represents claimants and defendants in European patent disputes before the Unified Patent Court, including the Paris divisions.

Contact the firm

Dhenne Avocats · 1 November 2026

Our analysis

Summary

In a procedural order of 30 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_2660/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division ordered service of the statement of claim for infringement of EP 3 574 526 on the representative of Lexar Europe B.V., which accepted it. In return, Micron agreed to extend Lexar Europe’s time limit for the statement of defence in case UPC_CFI_2556/2026 pending in Mannheim, as implemented by that division on 29 October 2026 (until 8 February 2027).

Related decisions

Düsseldorf Local Division, 2 October 2026, UPC_CFI_2660/2026, Micron Technology v Ultron: order allowing service on Lexar Europe by a bailiff.

Prepared by Dhenne Avocats from the official decision, consulted on 1 November 2026. The database is updated every week, on Friday. Only the official text is authoritative.

Going further

Lexicon: Patent infringement action, Local and central divisions (UPC)

Source and translations

Official source: Unified Patent Court registry link recorded in the record
Original language: English from the language of proceedings
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_2660/2026 official number

Follow this case

Parties

claimantMicron Technology, Inc.4 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantUltron AG2 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantLexar Europe B.V.2 decisions in the corpus Follow this party
defendantApacer Technology B.V.2 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

2 October 2026 Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, 2 October 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_2660/2026
Après l'échec des modes ordinaires, Micron est autorisée à faire signifier sa demande à Lexar Europe par un huissier néerlandais, à ses frais.
30 October 2026 Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, UPC_CFI_2660/2026, 30 October 2026) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_2660/2026

What the record states

Nature of the act: Infringement Action
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): Le juge-rapporteur de la division locale de Düsseldorf fait droit à la demande de Micron et procède à la signification de la demande au représentant de Lexar Europe, conformément à l’accord des parties.
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 3 574 526 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, 2 October 2026) cited in this record

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 3 574 526`	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 1 other decision(s): Micron Technology v Ultron (CFI, 2 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.