Opens in a new tab

Yunex v SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme (CFI, 30 April 2025)

Date30 April 2025
CourtCFI
DivisionVienna (AT) Local Division
Type of actionGeneric application
Case number(s)UPC_CFI_33/2024
Registry referenceUPC_CFI_33/2024 · App_17662/2025
PartiesYunex GmbH v. SWARCO FUTURIT Verkehrssignalsysteme Ges.m.b.H., STRABAG Infrastructure & Safety Solutions GmbH

Official decision (PDF) · UPC registry entry

Case timeline

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 30 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_33/2024, App_17662/2025 and App_20565/2025), Judge Schober, presiding judge and judge-rapporteur of the Vienna Local Division, granted Yunex GmbH, a non-party, access to all written pleadings and evidence in the infringement action brought by SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme against STRABAG Infrastructure & Safety Solutions on European patent EP 2 643 717, in which Chainzone Technology (Foshan) had intervened. The decision on the merits of 15 January 2025 is under appeal. The order takes a transparency-friendly line: absent any protected interest put forward by the parties, access is granted as requested, subject only to the redaction of personal data.

Question

May a third party obtain access to all pleadings and evidence in proceedings whose decision on the merits is under appeal, where no party objects?

Decision

Yes. Through Rule 262.1(b), the principle of public proceedings in Art. 45 UPCA extends to procedural information held by the Registry, in the public interest in information. Access should therefore generally be granted, particularly where no protected interest of the parties stands in the way. Invited by order of 14 April 2025 to comment by 24 April, the defendant raised no objection, the claimant and the intervener did not respond, and no ground for refusal was apparent. The parties have ten days to notify the Registry of any personal data to be redacted, and access extends only to the redacted version.

Key points for practice

Provisions applied

Agreement on a Unified Patent Court
Art. 45
Rules of Procedure
Rule 262.1(b)
Other provisions
General Data Protection Regulation (no article specified)
Case law cited
Court of Appeal, UPC_CoA_404/2023 (date not given in the order)

Related decisions

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.


Decisions in the same proceedings

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

  • UPC_CFI_33/2024 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

  1. 16 January 2025 SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme v STRABAG Infrastructure & Safety Solutions (CFI, 16 January 2025) Infringement Action · UPC_CFI_33/2024

    La division locale de Vienne juge le brevet EP 2 643 717 contrefait, prononce interdiction, information, destruction, rappel et dommages et intérêts dans leur principe, refuse la publication et met les frais à la charge de la défenderesse et de l’intervenante.

  2. 30 April 2025 Yunex v SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme (CFI, 30 April 2025) Generic application · UPC_CFI_33/2024

What the record states

Nature of the act
Generic application
Outcome (Dhenne Avocats summary)
L'accès à l'ensemble des mémoires et pièces est accordé au tiers demandeur, faute d'objection et de motif de refus, après occultation des données personnelles signalées par les parties dans un délai de dix jours.
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 2 643 717
Color-mixing convergent optical system
recorded proprietor: Swarco Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme GmbH
Mentioned in the analysis (role not qualified)
Also mentioned in 14 other decision(s): SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme v STRABAG Infrastructure & Safety · Natural person v SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme (CFI, 25 June 20 · Chainzone Technology (Foshan) v SWARCO FUTURIT Verkehrssignalsysteme ( · STRABAG Infrastructure & Safety Solutions v SWARCO FUTURIT Verkehrssig · Shenzhen Dianming Technology v SWARCO Futurit Verkehrssignalsysteme (C · SWARCO FUTURIT v Yunex (CFI, 2 July 2025) · SWARCO FUTURIT v Yunex (CFI, 3 June 2025) · Chainzone Technology (Foshan) v SWARCO FUTURIT Verkehrssignalsysteme (
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.