TRUMPF Laser- und Systemtechnik v IPG Laser (CFI, 25 July 2025)

Dhenne Avocats · 10 October 2026

Our analysis

Summary

By order of 25 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_733/2024 and UPC_CFI_255/2025), the Düsseldorf Local Division (Judge Thom, for Presiding Judge Thomas, Judge Schumacher as judge-rapporteur, and Judge Agergaard) decided to hear both TRUMPF Laser- und Systemtechnik’s infringement action against IPG Laser on EP 2 624 031 B1 and the counterclaim for revocation. It made that choice before the written procedure closed, so that a technically qualified judge could be allocated without delay.

Question

May the Local Division opt to hear infringement and revocation together before the end of the written procedure?

Decision

Yes. Rule 37.1 RoP provides for a decision as soon as practicable after the close of the written procedure, but Rule 37.2 RoP allows an earlier decision after hearing the parties, who raised no objection. Hearing both together is considered efficient: a single panel applies one construction of the claim to validity and infringement. The judge-rapporteur is instructed to ask the President of the Court of First Instance to allocate a technically qualified judge.

Key points for practice

• Practical point: an early decision under Rule 37.2 RoP allows the panel to be completed by a technical judge from the outset, which is a reason for parties to state their position on Article 33(3) UPCA early.

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court

Art. 33(3)(a)

Rules of Procedure

Rule 37

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.