Decisions of the Unified Patent Court recorded under "Life sciences and pharma" in UPC Litigation Watch, the case law database maintained by Dhenne Avocats.
Decisions of the Unified Patent Court in pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and medical devices: validity and sufficiency, SPCs, generic and biosimilar launches, provisional measures and evidence.
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.
124 decisions recorded
By order of 22 October 2026, the Milan section of the Central Division rules on Novo Nordisk A/S’s preliminary objection to three ancillary requests in the revocation action brought by Sandoz AG against unitary patent EP 3 689 365, on once-weekly semaglutide.
Read the analysisIn an order of 20 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1615/2026) under Rule 353 RoP, the single judge of The Hague Local Division rectifies point 5.4 of his provisional measures order of 8 October 2026, which, copying the application, covered iHerb websites in all EPC…
Read the analysisBy an order of 15 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1901/2026 and UPC_CFI_3259/2026), the Paris Local Division, sitting as a full panel presided over by Camille Lignières, referred Viatris Santé’s counterclaim for revocation to the Paris Central Division, in the dispute concerning Merz’s patent EP…
Read the analysisBy an order of 12 October 2026 in appeals UPC_CoA_146/2026, UPC_CoA_147/2026 and UPC_CoA_148/2026, the UPC Court of Appeal refused to extend by one month the time limit for Promosome LLC and The Scripps Research Institute to lodge their statements of grounds of…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 9 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1587/2025), the Milan section of the Central Division dismissed Biogaran’s revocation action against EP 4 223 296, held by H.
Read the analysisIn an order of 8 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_1615/2026), the single judge of The Hague Local Division, sitting with the parties’ consent, grants Caelus Lifesciences IP’s application for provisional measures based on EP 2 753 187 B2, which protects Eubacterium hallii and/or Alcaligenes…
Read the analysisIn this CAR-T life sciences infringement action, the Brussels Local Division dismissed the defendants' Rule 190 RoP applications for production of evidence directed at documents of the NIH (laboratory notebooks, invention reports, grant files, notice records), rejected the NIH's request to be…
Read the analysisBy order of 15 September 2026 (UPC_CFI_1830/2026), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division dismissed two applications by Vertex Pharmaceuticals and Lonza Netherlands in ToolGen's infringement action based on EP 4 397 760 (genome editing using guide RNA and Cas protein), directed…
Read the analysisBy order of 11 September 2026, the panel of the Hague Local Division hearing GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA v Moderna (EP 2 590 626) revoked, after the oral hearing of 1 September 2026, the judge-rapporteur's order excluding GSK's new cryo-TEM imaging reports as…
Read the analysisIn an order of 21 August 2026 issued in the joined files UPC_CFI_620/2025, UPC_CFI_1509/2025 and UPC_CFI_1511/2025, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division prepared the oral hearing of 3 September 2026 in the dispute between GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA and the Pfizer and…
Read the analysisBy order of 10 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_619/2025, UPC_CFI_1526/2025 and UPC_CFI_2033/2025), The Hague Local Division deals, in the dispute between GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA and thirteen Moderna group companies, with the consequences of EPO decisions on two divisional patents stemming from the same application.
Read the analysisBy order of 10 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_621/2025, UPC_CFI_1707/2025 and UPC_CFI_1708/2025), The Hague Local Division deals, in the dispute between GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA and companies of the Pfizer and BioNTech groups, with the consequences of EPO decisions on two divisional patents stemming from…
Read the analysisBy order of 30 July 2026, the Paris Local Division dismissed Viatris Santé's preliminary objection in the infringement action brought by three Merz companies on the basis of French supplementary protection certificate No.
Read the analysisBy order of 22 July 2026, issued in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_63/2026 and UPC_CoA_64/2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal declined to rule in advance on the admissibility of eleven new auxiliary requests filed by Advanced Brain Monitoring with its statement…
Read the analysisIn the action for infringement of EP 2 590 626 brought by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA against thirty Pfizer and BioNTech group companies (UPC_CFI_620/2025) and the joined counterclaims for revocation (UPC_CFI_1509/2025 and UPC_CFI_1511/2025), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division prepares the oral…
Read the analysisIn an order of 12 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1230/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Central Division orders EOFLOW to pay Insulet EUR 14,000 for the costs incurred in the application for leave to appeal (UPC_CFI_1167/2025) and in the appeal concerning a penalty payment…
Read the analysisIn the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_616/2025 (infringement) and UPC_CFI_1439/2025 (counterclaim for revocation) between GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA and Moderna Netherlands B.V.
Read the analysisThe Düsseldorf Local Division lifts the stay to allow the withdrawals by Sanofi Biotechnologies SAS and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. (action for infringement of EP 4 252 857, UPC_CFI_195/2025) and by the Amgen companies (counterclaim for revocation), filed in March 2026 with the…
Read the analysisIn the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_616/2025 and UPC_CFI_1439/2025 concerning EP 2 590 626, held by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division dismisses two applications: GSK's request for five party experts to be heard in person, and Moderna's third request…
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 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 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 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 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 analysisIn an order of 19 February 2026 (UPC_CFI_283/2026), the Paris Local Division partly granted the law firm Gowling WLG access to the file of the provisional measures proceedings between Merz and Viatris Santé (UPC_CFI_697/2025), concerning EP 2 377 536 and supplementary protection…
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 analysisBy order of 18 February 2026 in proceedings UPC_CFI_616/2025 and UPC_CFI_1439/2025 (EP 2 590 626), the judge-rapporteur of the Hague Local Division allowed GSK to extend its action against Moderna to the mNEXSPIKE product, dismissed Moderna's application to strike material from the…
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 the appeal brought by Merz Pharmaceuticals LLC, Merz Therapeutics GmbH and Merz Pharma France against the order of the Paris Local Division of 21 November 2025 (UPC_CFI_697/2025), which had refused their application for provisional measures against Viatris Santé based on French…
Read the analysisThe judge-rapporteur of the Court of Appeal, sitting alone, grants Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP access to Insulet Corporation’s Statement of Appeal and to a redacted version of EOFLow Co., Ltd.’s Statement of Response in appeal UPC_CoA_768/2024 (EP 4 201 327), decided…
Read the analysisThe Court of Appeal disposes, under Rule 360 RoP, of the procedural appeal brought by Viatris Santé against the order of the Paris Local Division of 29 October 2025 (UPC_CFI_697/2025), which had disregarded late-filed exhibits in provisional measures proceedings brought by Merz…
Read the analysisThe Munich Local Division revokes Sanofi’s European patent EP 2 493 466 in its entirety. The patent covers cabazitaxel in combination with prednisone or prednisolone for treating metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel-based regimen.
Read the analysisThe Milan Central Division ordered EOFLOW to pay a penalty of EUR 150,000 for violating the preliminary injunction granted by the Court of Appeal on 30 April 2025, on the basis of evidence that EOFLOW had exported 11,520 insulin pump devices to…
Read the analysisIn the infringement action brought by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA against fifteen Moderna group companies (UPC_CFI_619/2025), The Hague Local Division orders of its own motion, under Rule 302.1 RoP, that the single counterclaim for revocation directed at EP 4 066 856 and EP…
Read the analysisBy decision of 27 November 2025, the Milan Central Division, hearing Pari Pharma’s revocation action against Koninklijke Philips’ EP 3 397 329 B1 (air-flow in a nebulizer head), holds claim 1 as granted to lack novelty but maintains the patent as amended…
Read the analysisBy decision of 25 November 2025, given in the joined appeals UPC_CoA_528/2024 and UPC_CoA_529/2024, the Court of Appeal set aside the decisions of the Munich Central Division of 16 July 2024, which had revoked Amgen’s EP 3 666 797 (antibodies against PCSK9)…
Read the analysisIn an order of 16 October 2025, the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Central Division partly granted Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer's request for access to the file of the proceedings Insulet v EOFLOW (UPC_CFI_380/2024).
Read the analysisIn a decision of 15 October 2025, the judge-rapporteur of the Milan Central Division assessed the recoverable costs payable by EOFLOW to Insulet following the decision on the merits of 22 July 2025 (proceedings UPC_CFI_773/2025 and UPC_CFI_774/2025, patent EP 4 201 327).
Read the analysisIn a decision of 30 September 2025 (UPC_CFI_688/2025), the Hamburg Local Division confirmed, under Rule 365.1, the settlement of 10 September 2025 ending MED-EL's infringement action on EP 4 074 373 against two Nurotron companies.
Read the analysisBy order of 15 September 2025, common to the four infringement actions brought by Sanofi group companies on European patent EP 2 493 466 (UPC_CFI_145/2024 to UPC_CFI_148/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division summons the two party experts to the oral…
Read the analysisBy an order of 25 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_688/2025, ORD_35448/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division (Judge Johansson) refused to allow MED-EL's statement of claim in its infringement action concerning EP 4 074 373 to be served on Zhejiang Nurotron Biotechnology through…
Read the analysisBy procedural order of 13 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_191/2025, App_34218/2025 and App_34202/2025), the judge rapporteur of The Hague Local Division partly granted the applications by Genevant Sciences and Arbutus Biopharma for an extension of time in their action for infringement of EP 2…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 1 August 2025 (UPC_CFI_123/2024), the judge-rapporteur of the Hamburg Local Division fixed the costs recoverable by Samsung Bioepis NL from Alexion Pharmaceuticals for the provisional measures proceedings dismissed on 26 June 2024 (EP 3 167 888, Epysqli).
Read the analysisIn a decision of 22 July 2025 (UPC_CFI_597/2024), given both on EOFLOW’s revocation action and on Insulet’s counterclaim for infringement, the Milan Central Division dismissed by default the revocation action against unitary patent EP 4 201 327, EOFLOW having refused to provide…
Read the analysisBy decision of 19 June 2025, the Court of Appeal rejects as not allowable Alexion Pharmaceuticals’ application for rehearing of its order of 20 December 2024, which had upheld the refusal of provisional measures against nine Amgen group companies based on EP…
Read the analysisBy a decision of 19 June 2025 (UPC_CoA_402/2024), the Court of Appeal rejected Alexion Pharmaceuticals' application for rehearing of its order of 20 December 2024, which had upheld the refusal of provisional measures against Samsung Bioepis (EP 3 167 888, treatment of…
Read the analysisOn Insulet's application in its claim against EOFLOW for the costs of the provisional measures proceedings on EP 4 201 327, the judge rapporteur of the Milan Central Division partly protected the fee evidence filed.
Read the analysisIn BioMarin's action against Ascendis Pharma for infringement of EP 3 175 863 and the counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_18/2025 and UPC_CFI_439/2025), the Munich Local Division decided to hear both together, asked for a technically qualified judge in biotechnology, and set the end…
Read the analysisBy order of 28 May 2025, the Mannheim Local Division, following a settlement, permitted MED-EL Elektromedizinische Geräte to withdraw its infringement action on EP 4 074 373 against three Advanced Bionics companies (UPC_CFI_410/2023), cancelled the date set for pronouncing the decision and…
Read the analysisIn a decision of 13 May 2025 (UPC_CFI_505/2023), the Düsseldorf Local Division considers Regeneron’s EP 3 536 712 B1, which claims a composition comprising a PCSK9 inhibitor for use in reducing lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels, asserted together with its exclusive licensee Sanofi Biotechnology…
Read the analysisBy order of 30 April 2025 (UPC_CoA_768/2024, APL_64374/2024), the Court of Appeal sets aside the Milan Central Division’s order of 22 November 2024 and grants provisional measures against EOFlow, the Korean maker of the EOPatch and GlucoMen Day Pump insulin patch pumps,…
Read the analysisBy order of 11 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_597/2024), the Milan Central Division rules on three issues in EOFLOW’s revocation action against Insulet’s EP 4201327, in which Insulet has counterclaimed for infringement.
Read the analysisBy decision of 11 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_468/2024), the Düsseldorf Local Division allowed GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, with the defendants' consent, to withdraw its action against fourteen Pfizer group companies for infringement of EP 4 183 412.
Read the analysisBy order of 10 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_698/2024, ORD_12069/2025), Judge-rapporteur Postiglione (Milan Central Division) granted ALIUD PHARMA, a third party to the action for a declaration of non-infringement of EP 2 501 384 brought by Accord Healthcare against Novartis, access to the statement…
Read the analysisBy order of 3 April 2025 (UPC_CoA_194/2025), the Court of Appeal, sitting as a single judge, permits with Insulet’s agreement the withdrawal by EOFlow of its application for leave to appeal (Rule 221) against the Milan Central Division’s order of 15 February…
Read the analysisBy order of 2 April 2025 (UPC_CFI_18/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division rejected the preliminary objection of Ascendis, sued by BioMarin for infringement of EP 3 175 863 (variants of C-type natriuretic peptide) in respect of its product TransCon CNP,…
Read the analysisBy an order of 15 February 2025 (ORD_65815/2024, UPC_CFI_380/2024), Andrea Postiglione, judge rapporteur in the Milan Central Division, dismissed without examining the substance EOFLOW Co., Ltd.'s application for its costs in the provisional measures proceedings brought by Insulet Corporation on EP 4…
Read the analysisIn a procedural order of 24 January 2025, the Munich Local Division set the timetable for the proceedings on EP 2 493 466 between the Sanofi companies and Accord Healthcare, STADA, Dr Reddy’s and Zentiva (UPC_CFI_145, 146, 147, 148, 374, 463, 496…
Read the analysisBy a common order of 22 January 2025, issued after the preliminary interim conference in Sanofi's four joined infringement actions against Accord, Stada, Reddy and Zentiva (UPC_CFI_145/2024 to UPC_CFI_148/2024, EP 2 493 466, cabazitaxel), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division (Judge…
Read the analysis