TCL Europe v Corning (CFI, 8 September 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By an order of 8 September 2025 (UPC_CFI_337/2025, App_36126/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Central Division rejected TCL Europe’s request for a two-week extension, to 24 September 2025, of the time limit for its reply to the defence to revocation and its defence to the application to amend Corning’s patent EP 3 296 274. The order confirms a strict reading of Rule 9.3(a): technical complexity, laboratory testing and new features in the auxiliary requests are not enough without established special circumstances.

Question

May the revocation claimant obtain an extension of the two-month period for its reply to the defence and to the application to amend, on the ground of ongoing tests and new features in the auxiliary requests?

Decision

No. The time limits in the Rules form a balanced framework from which the Court departs cautiously and only in justified exceptional cases. The requesting party must raise and, where needed, prove special circumstances, and the timing of the request is relevant (paragraphs 9 to 11). The Rules expressly provide for auxiliary requests and allow two months to respond (paragraph 13, Rule 51). TCL Europe gave no detail on the nature, timing or effort of the tests and applied shortly before the deadline (paragraph 14). The absence of any effect on the hearing dates is not sufficient: an extension could prompt equality-of-arms requests and jeopardise the schedule (paragraph 15).

Key points for practice

• Practical point: an extension request should be made early and give concrete detail of the tests relied on (nature, duration, effort), a general appeal to complexity will fail.

Provisions applied

Rules of Procedure

Rules 9.3(a) and 51

Case law cited

Xiaomi v Daedalus, Hamburg Local Division, 25 July 2024, Genevant v Moderna, The Hague Local Division, 13 August 2025, Dai Nippon v Zapp, Düsseldorf Local Division, 3 September 2025, Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce, Düsseldorf Local Division, 20 January 2024, ITCiCo v BMW, Paris Central Division, 9 February 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.