Decisions of the Unified Patent Court recorded under "Appeals" in UPC Litigation Watch, the case law database maintained by Dhenne Avocats.
UPC decisions and orders since 1 June 2023. “Decision with commentary” means the entry contains an analysis by Dhenne Avocats. “Summary available” identifies a summary; “Reference” identifies a record without a detailed case note. Open the entry for the source and, where available, the facts, reasoning and practical implications. The official decision is authoritative.
Combinable filters, search within the records or the full text of the decisions, copy reference, selection and export. The keyword and reference search above remains available.
523 decisions recorded
In an order of 3 July 2026, given in joined appeal proceedings UPC_CoA_302/2025 and UPC_CoA_305/2025, the Court of Appeal rejects Rematec's application under Rule 333 for review of the judge-rapporteur's order of 30 March 2026.
Read the analysisIn an order of 2 July 2026 (UPC_CoA_935/2025), the Court of Appeal orders the appellant, a natural person doing business in Poland whose name is redacted, to provide security of EUR 28,000 for the costs of AMYCEL, LLC within three weeks of…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 1 July 2026 in the joined appeal proceedings PR-UPC-CoA-58/2026 and PR-UPC-CoA-59/2026, the Court of Appeal allows IPG Laser to withdraw its appeals against the Mannheim Local Division decision of 24 February 2026 (EP 2 951 625), declares the…
Read the analysisBy order of 30 June 2026, made in appeals UPC_CoA_692/2025 and UPC_CoA_854/2025 against the decision of the Hamburg Local Division of 10 July 2025 concerning EP 2 642 632, the Court of Appeal disregards a private expert opinion and a handbook extract…
Read the analysisDecisions of the judge-rapporteur on public access to written pleadings and evidence under Rule 262.1(b) RoP are subject to review by the panel under Rule 333, whose notion of a case management decision or order calls for a broad interpretation (para.
Read the analysisThe standing judge of the Court of Appeal refused Suinno leave to appeal, under Rule 221 RoP, the cost decision of the Paris Central Division of 31 March 2026, which had awarded Microsoft EUR 300,000 out of a claimed EUR 360,940.60 following…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 29 June 2026 (UPC-CoA-066/2026), the President of the Court of Appeal rejects SILIMED's application for review of the Registrar's decision of 10 April 2026, which had refused to remove as unauthorised the opt-out filed by Polytech on 30…
Read the analysisBy order of 29 June 2026 (UPC_CoA_52/2026), panel 3 of the Court of Appeal dismissed Huawei's appeal against the decision of the Munich Local Division of 26 March 2026, which had upheld access for the law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan…
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 June 2026 (UPC_CoA_57/2026), the Court of Appeal partly reverses the order for the production of evidence issued on 10 April 2026 by the judge-rapporteur of the Copenhagen Local Division in Dall Energy's infringement action against Polytechnik (EP…
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal of six Bosch group companies against the order of the Paris Local Division rejecting their preliminary objection to jurisdiction in the action for infringement of EP 4 144 599 brought by Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyage.
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal sets aside two orders of the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Central Division, which had declined jurisdiction and referred to the Düsseldorf Local Division the infringement action brought by Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyage against six Bosch group companies, including a…
Read the analysisIn an order of 10 June 2026 (UPC_CoA_85/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismisses Speed Care Mineral's request for discretionary review of the EUR 1 million value set for the counterclaim for revocation by the Hamburg Local Division in…
Read the analysisIn an order of 10 June 2026, given in appeal UPC_CoA_61/2026 brought by SharkNinja against the refusal of provisional measures by the Paris Local Division on 10 April 2026, the UPC Court of Appeal (panel presided over by Judge Kalden, with Judge…
Read the analysisIn an order of 1 June 2026 (UPC_CoA_48/2026), the Court of Appeal dismisses La Siddhi Consultancy's appeal against the order of the Milan Central Division of 13 March 2026, which had required it to provide security of EUR 75,000 for the costs…
Read the analysisBy order of 27 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_39/2026), given in German by the judge-rapporteur, the Court of Appeal grants the request of Anker Innovations Deutschland, sued by Philips in parallel proceedings on EP 2 867 997, for access to the pleadings and exhibits…
Read the analysisBy decision of 27 May 2026 in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_622/2025 and UPC_CoA_623/2025, the Court of Appeal (second panel) ruled on Hefei Xinhu Canned Motor Pump's appeals against the decision of the Düsseldorf Local Division of 8 May 2025, which had found…
Read the analysisBy decision of 26 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_916/2025), the Court of Appeal permitted Hurom to withdraw its appeal against the decision of the Mannheim Local Division of 2 October 2025 (UPC_CFI_162/2024) in its dispute with NUC Electronics over EP 2 028 981, declared…
Read the analysisBy order of 26 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_74/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal rejected Advanced Standard Communication LLC's (ASC) request for discretionary review of the order of 24 April 2026 in which the panel of the Munich Local Division required…
Read the analysisBy decision of 22 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_21/2026), the Court of Appeal gave a decision by default against Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy, which had failed to provide the EUR 600,000 security for costs ordered on 7 April 2026 in its…
Read the analysisBy order of 19 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_67/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal rejected the request for discretionary review and the application for suspensive effect lodged by Advanced Standard Communication LLC (ASC) against the Munich Local Division's order of 23…
Read the analysisBy order of 15 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_50/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal, after consulting the presiding judge of the first panel, ordered that the oral hearing of 26 May 2026 be conducted in English, without calling into question French as…
Read the analysisBy order of 13 May 2026, issued in German (UPC_CoA_53/2026), Judge Bart van den Broek, ruling for the Court of Appeal on Huawei's request for discretionary review under Rule 220.3 RoP, allowed the appeal against the Munich Local Division's order of 26…
Read the analysisOn an application for discretionary review by Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., the Court of Appeal grants leave to appeal against the decision of the Munich Local Division of 26 March 2026, which had upheld the access granted to Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &…
Read the analysisIn an order of 8 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_35/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal rejects Adobe's request for discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP) of the Paris Local Division's refusal to dismiss, under Rule 334(h) RoP, KEEEX's claims concerning non-UPC parts…
Read the analysisIn an order of 6 May 2026 (UPC_CoA_900/2025), the Court of Appeal permits, with Occlutech's express consent, the withdrawal of Lepu Medical's appeal against the Hamburg Local Division's order for provisional measures of 21 October 2025 (EP 2 387 951), declares the…
Read the analysisIn an order of 30 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_1/2026), the Court of Appeal dismisses as wholly inadmissible Adobe's immediate appeal against the Paris Local Division's order of 19 December 2025 setting at EUR 50,000 the security for costs to be provided by KEEEX…
Read the analysisIn an order of 28 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_56/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismisses Optopol's request for discretionary review of the Düsseldorf Local Division's order of 1 April 2026.
Read the analysisIn an order of 28 April 2026, the Court of Appeal stays, on the parties' joint application (Rule 295(d) RoP), the joined appeals UPC_CoA_928/2025 and UPC_CoA_929/2025 brought by FAKRO against the Hamburg Local Division's decision of 5 November 2025 (EP 2 476…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 27 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_60/2026), the presiding judge and rapporteur of the Court of Appeal allows, by analogy with Rule 265.1 RoP, the withdrawal of the application for the determination of costs (Rule 151) filed the same day by…
Read the analysisBy order of 27 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_917/2025), the Court of Appeal sets aside the Paris Local Division order of 21 November 2025, which had refused Merz’s application for provisional measures as out of time, and prohibits Viatris Santé, in France and until…
Read the analysisIn an order of 24 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_57/2026), the Court of Appeal refuses suspensive effect for Polytechnik's appeal against the Copenhagen Local Division's order of 10 April 2026 requiring it, under penalty, to produce drawings and manuals of its furnaces to Dall…
Read the analysisBy order of 17 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_901/2025), the Court of Appeal holds admissible and well founded the appeal brought by Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. against the order of The Hague Local Division of 22 October 2025, which had refused its application for…
Read the analysisBy order of 16 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_54/2026), the Court of Appeal rejects the requests of Belkin International Inc., Belkin B.V. and Belkin Limited for an extension of the time limit to provide the information required by Rule 225(e) or, in the alternative,…
Read the analysisBy an order of 14 April 2026 (UPC_CoA_48/2026), the Court of Appeal rejects La Siddhi Consultancy's application for suspensive effect against the Milan Central Division's order of 13 March 2026, which required it to provide EUR 75,000 security for costs in its…
Read the analysisBy order of 7 April 2026, the Court of Appeal orders Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing, proprietor of EP 2 671 173, which the Paris Central Division revoked in its entirety, to provide Microsoft with security of EUR 600,000 for the…
Read the analysisBy order of 3 April 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal dismisses the request for simultaneous French/English interpretation made by the Bosch companies, respondents in Valeo Systèmes d’essuyage’s joined appeals (UPC_CoA_4/2026 and UPC_CoA_13/2026) against the orders of the Paris Central…
Read the analysisIn an order of 30 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_12/2026), the Court of Appeal sets aside the orders of the Mannheim Local Division of 27 November 2025 and 16 January 2026 and allows Amazon to take notes of the audio recording of a hearing…
Read the analysisBy order of 30 March 2026, the Court of Appeal rules on the appeal of Sinocare and A. Menarini Diagnostics against the order of The Hague Local Division of 17 October 2025, which, at the request of Abbott Diabetes Care, had granted…
Read the analysisIn an order of 30 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_302/2025 and UPC_CoA_305/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal dismisses Rematec's request to refer its cost-fixing application to the Mannheim Local Division with an instruction that the Court of Appeal filing date count as…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 27 March 2026 in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_409/2025, UPC_CoA_410/2025 and UPC_CoA_420/2025, the Court of Appeal sets aside the two orders of 11 March 2025 in which the Mannheim Local Division had found infringement of EP 2 028 981…
Read the analysisBy order of 27 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_898/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal (Judges Voß, presiding and judge rapporteur, van den Broek, Sabotier, and technically qualified Judges Elmeros and Schenkl) dismissed ONWARD Medical's appeal against the Munich Local Division's refusal of provisional measures…
Read the analysisBy decision of 25 March 2026, the Court of Appeal permits, with Amgen’s consent, the withdrawal of the applications for rehearing filed by Sanofi and Regeneron against the decision of 25 November 2025 that had set aside the revocation of EP 3…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 24 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_641/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal allowed Sanofi Biotechnology SAS and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. to withdraw their appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division decision of 13 May 2025 (UPC_CFI_505/2023, EP 3 536 712), which dismissed…
Read the analysisIn an order of 24 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_44/2026), the Court of Appeal rejects ALPINA Coffee Systems' application for suspensive effect of its appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division's decision of 18 March 2026, which had largely upheld CUP&CINO's infringement action (EP 3…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 24 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_646/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal allowed Amgen N.V. and six other Amgen companies to withdraw their appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division decision of 13 May 2025 (UPC_CFI_505/2023, EP 3 536 712), insofar as…
Read the analysisIn an order of 24 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_935/2025), the Court of Appeal declares inadmissible the second application for suspensive effect filed by the appellant, the defendant found liable by default by The Hague Local Division on 21 October 2025 for infringing Amycel's…
Read the analysisIn an order of 18 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_930/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal dismissed EOFlow Co., Ltd.'s appeal against the Milan Central Division order of 4 December 2025 (UPC_CFI_1167/2025), which had refused to treat as confidential under Rule 262.2 business information disclosed…
Read the analysisBy an order of 16 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_904/2025 and UPC_CoA_905/2025), the Court of Appeal dismissed Vivo's appeals against two orders of the Paris Local Division of 30 October 2025 which, in Sun Patent Trust's infringement actions (EP 3 407 524 and EP…
Read the analysisBy an order of 16 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_3/2026), the Court of Appeal rejected Ecovacs Robotics' appeal against the Düsseldorf Local Division's order of 19 December 2025 which, on Roborock (HK)'s request for review, had revoked the ex parte order for inspection and…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 11 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_934/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal allowed F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Roche Diabetes Care GmbH, following a settlement, to withdraw their application for provisional measures based on EP 1 962 668, which the Düsseldorf…
Read the analysisBy an order of 10 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_37/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed the request for discretionary review (Rule 220.3 RoP) filed by the Angelalign companies against the Düsseldorf Local Division's order of 26 February 2026 which, in…
Read the analysisBy order of 6 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_789/2025 and UPC_CoA_813/2025), the Court of Appeal, presided over by Klaus Grabinski, referred four questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union in the dispute between Dyson and Dreame International and Eurep concerning unitary…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 6 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_895/2025 and UPC_CoA_896/2025), the Court of Appeal permitted Black Sheep Retail Products, with HL Display's consent, to withdraw its appeal against the Hague Local Division's decision of 10 October 2025 (EP 2 432 351) and…
Read the analysisIn an order of 4 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_678/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal rejected Hurom's request to file a further reply after NUC's Statement of Response and cross-appeal, in the appeal against the Paris Local Division decision of 23 May…
Read the analysisIn an order of 3 March 2026 (UPC_CoA_887/2025), the Court of Appeal permitted Washtower, with the agreement of the Bega companies, to withdraw its application for provisional measures at first instance and on appeal, after The Hague Local Division had granted those…
Read the analysisIn an order of 27 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_884/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the UPC Court of Appeal rejected Sibio Technology Limited's request under Rule 36 for a further exchange of written pleadings in its appeal against the Paris Central Division's dismissal of its…
Read the analysisBy order of 26 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_34/2026), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal dismissed as inadmissible EOFlow's request for discretionary review and its auxiliary request for leave to appeal.
Read the analysisBy decision of 24 February 2026 in the joined proceedings UPC_CoA_883/2025 and UPC_CoA_892/2025, the Court of Appeal (Panel 2) rejected Suinno's applications for rehearing of its security for costs order and its default decision of 12 July 2025, which had dismissed the…
Read the analysisBy decision of 24 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_10/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal granted Gowling WLG, a non-party firm, access to ten pleadings and documents in the appeal Sumi Agro v Syngenta (UPC_CoA_523/2024, EP 2 152 073), subject to redaction of…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 24 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_9/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal partly granted the law firm Gowling WLG access to three written pleadings lodged on appeal in the dispute between Boehringer Ingelheim and Zentiva Portugal concerning EP 1…
Read the analysisIn an order of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_889/2025), the Court of Appeal set aside the orders of the Munich Local Division (UPC_CFI_114/2025) requiring Syntorr, a Cypriot company and proprietor of EP 3 835 470, to provide EUR 2,000,000 as security for costs…
Read the analysisIn an order of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_19/2026), the Court of Appeal refused suspensive effect to Guardant Health's appeal against the EUR 400,000 interim award of costs made against it by the Paris Local Division on 23 January 2026, after its application…
Read the analysisBy order of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_890/2025), the Court of Appeal, on discretionary review, set aside the Munich Local Division's orders requiring Syntorr, claimant in an infringement action on EP 2 670 898 against three Arthrex companies, to provide security for costs…
Read the analysisBy decision of 18 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_744/2025 and UPC_CoA_750/2025, EP 3 167 888), the standing judge of the Court of Appeal permitted Samsung Bioepis to withdraw its applications for leave to appeal the cost decisions issued by the Hamburg Local Division on…
Read the analysisBy order of 18 February 2026 in the joined proceedings UPC_CoA_528/2024 and UPC_CoA_529/2024 (EP 3 666 797), the Court of Appeal rejected Sanofi and Regeneron's request for suspensive effect of their application for rehearing of the decision of 25 November 2025, which…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 17 February 2026, given in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_302/2025 and UPC_CoA_305/2025, the Court of Appeal set aside in full the Mannheim Local Division decision of 31 January 2025, which had revoked Rematec's EP 2 548 648, concerning a…
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal dismisses Huawei’s appeals against the orders of the Munich Local Division of 28 November 2025 granting TP-Link access to written pleadings in the closed actions between Huawei and Netgear concerning the patent asserted against TP-Link (paras.
Read the analysisIn an order of 17 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_937/2025 and UPC_CoA_938/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal refused the bioMérieux companies, appealing the Milan Central Division decision of 23 October 2025 maintaining Labrador Diagnostics' EP 3 756 767 in amended form, both…
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal declares admissible the appeal lodged by Valeo Systèmes d’Essuyage under Rule 220.2 RoP against the order of the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Central Division of 23 December 2025.
Read the analysisIn a decision of 9 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_8/2026), given in German by a standing judge, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of PAPST LICENSING GmbH & Co. KG against the Paris Central Division's decision upholding the EPO's refusal to register unitary…
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal holds inadmissible the appeal by EOFlow Co., Ltd. against the order of the Milan Central Division of 4 December 2025 (UPC_CFI_1167/2025), which, at the request of Insulet Corporation, had imposed penalty payments of EUR 150,000 for non-compliance with…
Read the analysisIn an order of 4 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_891/2025), the Court of Appeal dismissed Centripetal Limited's appeal against the Mannheim Local Division's order of 2 October 2025 which, on Palo Alto Networks, Inc.'s request for review, had revoked the saisie order based on…
Read the analysisIn an order of 3 February 2026 (UPC_CoA_8/2025), given in Italian by the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal, the EUR 19,000 security that Bhagat Textile Engineers had deposited for the costs of Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co KG was released and…
Read the analysisIn an order of 29 January 2026 (UPC_CoA_931/2025), the President of the Court of Appeal, sitting as standing judge, closed the proceedings on the request for discretionary review (Rule 220.3) filed by Alpinestars S.p.A.
Read the analysisAccess by an employee of the opposing party is necessary where the confidential licence agreements are those on which the patent holder bases its arguments on FRAND terms, a central aspect of the case (para.
Read the analysisBeing an employee of a party is not in itself a ground for refusing access to highly confidential information (para. 27). Excluding employees would severely restrict the party’s freedom to choose who represents it and would compromise its right to an effective…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 26 January 2026, the President of the Court of Appeal dismissed a European Patent Attorney's petition for review of the Registrar's decision of 15 September 2025 refusing to enter him on the list of UPC representatives.
Read the analysis