Opens in a new tab

Nokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 1 June 2026)

Date1 June 2026
CourtCFI
DivisionMunich (DE) Local Division
Type of actionInfringement Action
Case number(s)UPC_CFI_661/2025
Registry referenceUPC_CFI_661/2025
PartiesNokia Technologies Oy v. Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd. a.o.

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 a decision of 1 June 2026, following a settlement reached during the written procedure, the Munich Local Division allows Nokia Technologies Oy to withdraw infringement action UPC_CFI_661/2025 concerning EP 4 090 075, and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd. and the 31 other defendants to withdraw counterclaim for revocation UPC_CFI_236/2026. Each party bears its own costs. The refund of court fees is limited to 50% for each side, although the claimant had asked for 60%. Departing from the Mannheim Local Division, the decision confirms that the applicable version of Rule 370.9(b) depends on the date of the application to withdraw.

Question

Which rate of court fee refund applies to a withdrawal filed after 31 December 2025 in proceedings started earlier?

Decision

The withdrawals are permitted, each side having consented to the other’s withdrawal (paragraphs 6 to 9). Since the parties stated that they sought no costs decision, each bears its own costs (paragraph 10). The division applies Rule 370.9(b) as in force since 1 January 2026, the Court of Appeal having held in four decisions that the filing date of the application to withdraw is decisive. It declines to follow the diverging view of the Mannheim Local Division of 27 March 2026 and sees no need to grant leave to appeal (paragraphs 11 to 14). Each side is refunded 50% of the fees paid and Nokia’s request for more is rejected (paragraph 15 and operative part).

Key points for practice

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
Art. 69
Rules of Procedure
Rules 265.1, 265.2, 370.9 and 370.11
Case law cited
MSG Maschinenbau v EJP Maschinen, Munich Local Division, 11 October 2024, VMR Products v NJOY Netherlands, Court of Appeal, 9 January 2026, Black Sheep Retail Products v HL Display, Court of Appeal, 6 March 2026, Court of Appeal, 9 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_15/2026), Nokia v Warner Bros. Discovery, Mannheim Local Division, 27 March 2026, not followed

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: Standard essential patent (SEP), FRAND offer and counter-offer, Injunctions and standard essential patents, Patent infringement action.

Dhenne Avocats blog: FRAND at the UPC: What the Court Has Decided, What Remains Open.

Publications by Matthieu Dhenne: Munich’s FRAND Guidelines: A Compass Drawn Too Finely, Tesla v. InterDigital and the FRAND Undertaking Inside the Pool (Kluwer Patent Blog).

Further reading: M. Dhenne, “Calculation of FRAND Royalties: An Overview of Practices Around the World”, European Intellectual Property Review 2019, vol. 41, no. 12, p. 754. M. Dhenne, “Conversant v LG: What about FRAND in France?”, European Intellectual Property Review 2019, vol. 41, no. 9, p. 585.

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_661/2025 official number

Follow this case

Parties

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
Infringement Action
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
Les désistements réciproques sont admis, chaque partie conserve ses frais et le remboursement des taxes est limité à 50 % en application de la règle 370.9, b), dans sa version en vigueur depuis le 1er janvier 2026.
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

Related decisions cited in the analyses

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

PublicationRole in the disputeFamilyStandard and declarationPoolSources
EP 4 090 075Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified)
Also mentioned in 2 other decision(s): Nokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 8 June 2026) · Nokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 20 April 2026)
not recordednot recordednot recordedEspacenet
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.

Follow

Weekly summary, on Fridays.