Opens in a new tab

Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CFI, 26 July 2024)

Date26 July 2024
CourtCFI
DivisionDüsseldorf (DE) Local Division
Type of actionAmend Document
Registry referenceApp_42088/2024 · ORD_42132/2024
PartiesValeo Electrification

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 order of 26 July 2024 (UPC_CFI_347/2024, ACT_37931/2024, App_42088/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Düsseldorf Local Division granted Valeo Electrification leave under Rule 263 RoP to change the claim in its application for provisional measures of 1 July 2024 against three Magna group companies based on EP 3 320 602: the feature of claim 6, previously relied on « alternatively », becomes cumulative.

Question

Does Rule 263 RoP apply to an application for provisional measures, and must an unconditional limitation of the claim be justified?

Decision

The explanation required by the second sentence of Rule 263.1 RoP as to why the change was not included in the original pleading may be dispensable for an unconditional limitation (Rule 263.3 RoP), where the basis for the limitation was laid in advance by an auxiliary request and the earlier submissions can still be used. Rule 263.3 RoP is not confined to proceedings on the merits: its partial reference to an « action » is no obstacle, since the wording of the rule is not uniform, and the rule sits among the general procedural provisions, which also apply to provisional measures. The defendants suffer no undue prejudice: adding the feature narrows the scope of the injunction sought, which is to their advantage, and the feature, already relied on in the original application, had to be taken into account in their defence despite tight deadlines. This is not an amendment of the patent within the meaning of Rules 30 or 50.2 RoP.

Key points for practice

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
Art. 62
Rules of Procedure
Rules 30, 50.2, 263.1 and 263.3

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

No case number recorded in this record.

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
Amend Document
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
Valeo est autorisée à rendre cumulative, dans sa demande de mesures provisoires, la caractéristique de la revendication 6 jusque-là invoquée à titre alternatif.
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

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 3 320 602
Rotary electric machine provided with a reservoir of lubricant for lubricating a rolling bearing and for cooling the machine
recorded proprietor: Valeo Equipements Electriques Moteur SAS
Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified)
Also mentioned in 11 other decision(s): Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CFI, ORD_56545/2024, 31 October 2024 · Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CoA, ORD_68769/2024, 13 January 2025 · Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CFI, ORD_68626/2024, 10 January 2025 · Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CFI, 12 December 2024) · Magna International France v Valeo Electrification (CoA, 11 December 2 · Magna PT v Valeo Electrification (CoA, 21 November 2024) · Valeo Electrification v Magna PT (CFI, ORD_60265/2024, 20 November 202 · Magna International France v Valeo Electrification (CoA, 14 November 2
not recordednot recordednot recordedEspacenet · European Patent Register
existence and title of the publication checked on 30 October 2026 (Google Patents, Espacenet and Register links are not checked automatically)
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.