ArcelorMittal v XPENG (CFI, 19 February 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 19 February 2025 (UPC_CFI_583/2024, ACT_54607/2024, ORD_8329/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division (Judge Lignières) granted POSCO, as a member of the public, access to ArcelorMittal’s statement of claim and its exhibits, except Exhibit 8, which is covered by a confidentiality order, in the infringement action on EP 3 290 200 against XPENG Inc. and sixteen other defendants. The order accepts that an interest tied to claim interpretation in parallel EPO opposition proceedings can justify access, even at an early stage.

Question

Does a third party pursuing an opposition appeal against the same patent before the EPO have a sufficient interest in accessing the pleadings of an infringement action that has barely begun (Rule 262.1(b))?

Decision

Yes, to a limited extent. A reasoned request must show a concrete, verifiable and legitimate interest, weighed against the integrity of the proceedings. Only the statement of claim had been filed, with no debate on validity, but claims must be interpreted in the same way for infringement and validity, according to the Court of Appeal, which gives POSCO a legitimate interest in seeing the statement of claim and its exhibits. Exhibit 8, confidential and irrelevant to the scope of protection, was excluded, as were purely procedural filings (service dates, change of language). ArcelorMittal opposed the request. The defendants left it to the court.

Key points for practice

• An EPO opponent’s interest in knowing the claim interpretation advanced by the proprietor before the UPC can ground access to the statement of claim.
• Practical point: an access request should target the pleadings relevant to the interest relied on, exhibits covered by a confidentiality order remain excluded.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 45

Rules of Procedure

Rules 262.1(b) and 333

Case law cited

Sanofi v Amgen, Munich Central Division, 20 September 2023 (UPC_CFI_1/2023), Paris Central Division (UPC_CFI_316/2023), Court of Appeal (UPC_CoA_335/2023 and UPC_CoA_1/2024).

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.