Niche Biomedical v Onward Medical (CFI, 6 August 2026)

Date	6 August 2026
Court	CFI
Division	Munich (DE) Local Division
Type of action	Other
Case number(s)	UPC_CFI_1569/2025
Registry reference	UPC-CFI-0001569/2025
Parties	Niche Biomedical, Inc. d.b.a. Aneuvo v. Onward Medical N.V.

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

In a decision of 6 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_1569/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division fixes the costs recoverable by Niche Biomedical, Inc. (ANEUVO) from ONWARD Medical N.V. following provisional measures proceedings UPC_CFI_693/2025 (EP 3 421 081). With the value of those proceedings set at EUR 1,000,000, the ceiling for representation costs is EUR 112,000: that amount is awarded, payable within three weeks of service, and the balance of the EUR 168,200 claimed is refused. The decision confirms that raising the ceiling requires an express and unambiguous request.

Question

Does a quantified request for provisional costs above the ceiling amount to a request to raise that ceiling?

Decision

No. The value of the proceedings, set at EUR 1,000,000 under the Administrative Committee decision of 24 April 2023, entails a ceiling of EUR 112,000 (sections 1.1 and 1.2). The earlier request for a sum of EUR 168,000 was not an explicit request to raise the ceiling, which must be made expressly in light of Art. 76 UPCA, an increase would not have been justified anyway, as the case was not particularly complex, and is no longer possible once the application for provisional measures has been decided (section 1.3). The hourly rates, although at the upper end, are not objectionable (section 2). Even limited to the uncontested items, the amount exceeds the ceiling, so EUR 112,000 is awarded, general comparisons with other proceedings are irrelevant (sections 3.2 and 3.3).

Key points for practice

Practical point: a party wishing to recover more than the ceiling must expressly ask for it to be raised before the application for provisional measures is decided (section 1.3).

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court: Art. 76
Rules of Procedure: Rules 152.2, 156.1, 157, 221.1 and 295(m)
Other provisions: Administrative Committee decision of 24 April 2023 on the scale of ceilings for recoverable costs, Art. 2
Case law cited: Onward Medical v Niche Biomedical, Court of Appeal, 27 March 2026

Related decisions

Onward Medical v Niche Biomedical, 17 October 2025, order on the application for provisional measures.

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

UPC_CFI_1569/2025 official number

Follow this case

Parties

claimantNiche Biomedical, Inc. d.b.a. AneuvoFollow this party
defendantOnward Medical N.V.normalised name: ONWARD Medical N.V.4 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: Other
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary): Le juge rapporteur fixe la valeur de la procédure de mesures provisoires à 1 000 000 euros et alloue 112 000 euros, montant du plafond, faute de demande expresse de relèvement.
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 3 421 081 mentioned in: Dhenne Avocats analysis Follow this patent

Related decisions cited in the analyses

ONWARD Medical v Niche Biomedical (CoA, 27 March 2026) cited in this record
ONWARD Medical v Niche Biomedical (CFI, 17 October 2025) 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 3 421 081`	Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified) Also mentioned in 3 other decision(s): Niche Biomedical v ONWARD Medical (CoA, 27 April 2026) · ONWARD Medical v Niche Biomedical (CoA, 27 March 2026) · ONWARD Medical v Niche Biomedical (CFI, 17 October 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.