Standard-essential patents and FRAND
Decisions of the Unified Patent Court recorded under "Standard-essential patents and FRAND" in UPC Litigation Watch, the case law database maintained by Dhenne Avocats.
Decisions of the Unified Patent Court concerning standard-essential patents and FRAND commitments: infringement notices, offers and counteroffers, willingness to take a licence, comparable licences, confidentiality of agreements, injunctions and provisional measures.
Find a decision in three steps
- 1. SearchEnter a party name, case number or keyword.
- 2. RefineUse the filters to refine your search, then select Filter.
- 3. ReadOpen a title. The “Decision with commentary” badge identifies a case note by the firm.
Scope, method and reading key
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.
Advanced search
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.
Favourites are kept in this browser only.
Compare two parties or two issues
Coverage actually indexed: 2524 records out of 2524, full text available for 2349 decisions (official PDFs extracted), 0 pending, 32 requiring optical recognition, 126 without a PDF. A search within decision text covers only extracted documents and is not exhaustive. Scope: Dhenne Avocats corpus, counts are neither market shares nor success rates.
208 decisions recorded
Huawei Technologies v HMD Global (CFI, UPC_CFI_481/2025, 20 October 2026)
In a decision of 20 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_481/2025 and UPC_CFI_1358/2025), the Mannheim Local Division, hearing Huawei’s action for infringement of EP 3 667 981 against HMD Global and a counterclaim for revocation, held that the asserted claims were not entitled to the…
Read the analysisAX Wireless v Xiaomi (CFI, 12 October 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_319/2024, 21 September 2026)
In an order of 21 September 2026 published on 29 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_319/2024 and UPC_CFI_728/2024), presiding judge and judge-rapporteur Pierluigi Perrotti of the Milan Local Division sets the conduct of the hearing of 24 and 25 September 2026 in Ericsson’s action against…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_318/2024, 21 September 2026)
In an order of 21 September 2026 published on 29 October 2026 (UPC_CFI_318/2024 and UPC_CFI_730/2024), judge-rapporteur Alima Zana of the Milan Local Division sets the conduct of the hearing of 24 and 25 September 2026 in Ericsson’s action against ASUSTek and Arvato…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Verifone (CFI, UPC_CFI_1795/2026, 14 September 2026)
The Mannheim Local Division allows Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) to withdraw its infringement action against Verifone GmbH, Adyen N.V. and other Verifone companies on EP 3 397 009 following a settlement, and declares the proceedings closed.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Verifone (CFI, UPC_CFI_661/2026, 14 September 2026)
In a decision of 14 September 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permitted Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson to withdraw its action for infringement of EP 4 277 422 against the Verifone companies and Adyen (UPC_CFI_661/2026) following a settlement.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1571/2025, 14 September 2026)
In a decision of 14 September 2026, the Paris Central Division permitted Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson to withdraw its infringement actions (UPC_CFI_1571/2025 and UPC_CFI_710/2026, EP 3 672 085 and EP 3 659 314) following a settlement with Shenzhen Transsion, and closed both proceedings.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Verifone (CFI, UPC_CFI_1796/2026, 14 September 2026)
In a decision of 14 September 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permitted Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson to withdraw its infringement action on EP 2 506 479 (UPC_CFI_1796/2026) following a settlement with the Verifone companies which also covers the claims against…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_710/2026, 14 September 2026)
In a decision of 14 September 2026, the Paris Central Division permitted Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson to withdraw its infringement actions (UPC_CFI_1571/2025 and UPC_CFI_710/2026, EP 3 672 085 and EP 3 659 314) following a settlement with Shenzhen Transsion, and closed both proceedings.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, 9 September 2026)
The Mannheim Local Division allows Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) to withdraw its infringement action against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and eight other defendants on EP 4 277 422, following a settlement with Transsion.
Read the analysisInterDigital CE Patent v The Walt Disney (CFI, 2 September 2026)
Read the French analysisInterDigital CE Patent Holdings v The Walt Disney Company (CFI, 2 September 2026)
The Düsseldorf Local Division classifies as confidential, under Rule 262A RoP, the information to be provided under sections III.2 and III.3 of the decision given the same day in UPC_CFI_297/2025 (EP 2 080 349).
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, 26 August 2026)
The Hague Local Division allows Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) to withdraw its three infringement actions against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. and nine other defendants on EP 2 712 236, EP 3 836 631 and EP 3 245 744, following a settlement…
Read the analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CFI, 25 August 2026)
By decision of 25 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_362/2025 and UPC_CFI_0001786/2025), the Paris Local Division permitted, under Rule 265 RoP, the withdrawal of Sun Patent Trust's infringement action on EP 3 407 524 against Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia, Vivo Tech and Vivo Mobile Communication,…
Read the analysisTELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_757/2024, 24 August 2026)
In an order of 24 August 2026 issued in the infringement action (UPC_CFI_757/2024) and the counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_539/2025) concerning EP 2 819 131, the judge-rapporteur of the Lisbon Local Division dismissed ASUSTek's confidentiality request in Ericsson v ASUSTek.
Read the analysisTELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_2665/2026, 24 August 2026)
By order of 24 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_2665/2026 and UPC_CFI_539/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Lisbon Local Division stayed Ericsson's applications against ASUSTek for re-establishment of rights (Rule 320 RoP) and for costs (Rule 150 RoP), pending the Court of Appeal's decision on the…
Read the analysisInterDigital VC v The Walt Disney (CFI, 18 August 2026)
In a decision of 18 August 2026 issued in the infringement action UPC_CFI_86/2025 (EP 2 465 265), the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division allowed InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc.
Read the analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, 18 August 2026)
In an order of 29 July 2026 issued in the infringement action UPC_CFI_565/2024 (and proceedings UPC-CFI-0002246/2025) concerning EP 2 337 403 and EP 3 944 587, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division ruled on the confidentiality club in Koninklijke KPN v…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CoA, 11 August 2026)
By order of 11 August 2026, the Court of Appeal allows Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) and three group companies to withdraw their appeal (UPC_CoA_91/2026) against the Lisbon Local Division’s order of 26 May 2026 dismissing their application under Rules 360 and 361,…
Read the analysisWilus Institute of Standards v ASUSTeK Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_452/2025, 10 August 2026)
In a decision of 10 August 2026 (UPC_CFI_452/2025, counterclaims UPC_CFI_1152/2025 and UPC_CFI_752/2026, EP 3 849 157), the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permits the withdrawal by Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology and the ASUS companies under Rule 265 RoP and…
Read the analysisWilus Institute of Standards v ASUSTeK Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_752/2026, 10 August 2026)
Read the French analysisWilus Institute of Standards v ASUSTeK Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_1152/2025, 10 August 2026)
Read the French analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CFI, UPC_CFI_362/2025, 30 July 2026)
By order of 30 July 2026 under Rule 105.5 RoP, following the interim conference held online the day before, the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division, in Sun Patent Trust's infringement action against three Vivo companies based on EP 3 407 524…
Read the analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CFI, UPC_CFI_361/2025, 30 July 2026)
In an order of 30 July 2026 issued after the interim conference held by video link on 29 July 2026 (Rule 105.5 RoP), the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division sets the value of Sun Patent Trust's infringement action against three Vivo…
Read the analysisTELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, 29 July 2026)
By decision of 29 July 2026, the Lisbon Local Division confirmed, at Ericsson's sole request, the costs agreement reached with ASUSTek in the infringement action concerning EP 2 819 131, and ordered ASUSTek to pay EUR 150,000.
Read the analysisInterDigital VC Holdings v The Walt Disney Company (CFI, 24 July 2026)
In a decision of 23 July 2026, given in the joined cases UPC_CFI_87/2025 and UPC_CFI_488/2025, the Düsseldorf Local Division held that eleven Disney group companies infringe, through the Disney+ service, claims 5 and 17 of InterDigital VC Holdings’ EP 2 449 782…
Read the analysisAmazon.com v InterDigital VC Holdings (CoA, 15 July 2026)
In an order of 15 July 2026 (UPC_CoA_936/2025), the Court of Appeal permitted InterDigital, with Amazon's consent, to withdraw its application for provisional measures and declared closed Amazon's appeal against the Mannheim Local Division's order of 22 December 2025, which had rejected…
Read the analysisShenzhen Transsion Holdings v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (CFI, 14 July 2026)
In a decision of 14 July 2026, the Lisbon Local Division allowed Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co. Ltd. to withdraw its infringement action on EP 4 123 910 (UPC_CFI_850/2026), before any statement of defence and with the Ericsson companies' consent, and declared the…
Read the analysisInterDigital VC Holdings v Amazon.com (CFI, 13 July 2026)
Read the French analysisHuawei Technologies v Sercomm (CFI, 8 July 2026)
Following an early interim hearing, the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division set, by order of 8 July 2026 (Rule 105.5), the timetable for Huawei Technologies Co.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_539/2025, 2 July 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_757/2024, 2 July 2026)
By order of 2 July 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Lisbon Local Division acknowledges that Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson has complied with Rule 118.8 RoP in respect of all the orders in the decision of 6 May 2026, with effect from 15 June…
Read the analysisHuawei Technologies v Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (CoA, 29 June 2026)
By 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 analysisNokia Technologies v Acer (CFI, 22 June 2026)
In the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_293/2025 (infringement) and UPC_CFI_868/2025 (counterclaim for revocation) concerning EP 2 661 892, the Munich Local Division allows the mutual withdrawals of Nokia Technologies Oy and of the defendants Acer, Inc., Acer Computer GmbH and CPYou B.V., five days…
Read the analysisNokia v Acer (CFI, 22 June 2026)
Read the French analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v Motorola Mobility (CFI, 18 June 2026)
In the action for infringement of EP 3 016 464 brought by Advanced Standard Communication LLC against Motorola Mobility LLC and three other defendants, the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division grants Rule 262A protection for information in the rejoinder on the…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTeK Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_1129/2026, 17 June 2026)
In an order of 17 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1129/2026), the Milan Local Division dismisses Ericsson's application for provisional measures against ASUSTeK and Arvato Netherlands based on EP 2 727 342 ("Reference Picture Signaling"), while the infringement action on the merits (UPC_CFI_318/2024) and the…
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTeK Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_1130/2026, 17 June 2026)
By order of 17 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1130/2026), a four-judge panel of the Milan Local Division dismissed for lack of urgency the application for provisional measures by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson against ASUSTeK Computer Inc.
Read the analysisTELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v ASUSTEK COMPUTER (CFI, 17 June 2026)
By order of 17 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1130/2026), the Milan Local Division dismissed for lack of urgency Ericsson's application for provisional measures against ASUSTeK Computer and Arvato Netherlands based on EP 3 076 673, which concerns decoding and encoding pictures of a video…
Read the analysisInterDigital VC v The Walt Disney (CFI, 16 June 2026)
Read the French analysisInterDigital VC Holdings v The Walt Disney Company (CFI, 16 June 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CFI, 15 June 2026)
In proceedings UPC_CFI_1568/2025, UPC_CFI_1791/2025 and UPC_CFI_1793/2025 brought by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co.
Read the analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, 11 June 2026)
Read the French analysisNokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 8 June 2026)
In an order of 8 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1291/2026), the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division allows the withdrawal, with the respondents' consent, of the application for provisional measures brought by Nokia Technologies Oy and Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy against two Geely…
Read the analysisSun Patent Trust v LYNK & CO International (CFI, 3 June 2026)
In a decision of 3 June 2026 (UPC_CFI_1661/2025), the Hamburg Local Division permits, with the consent of the seven defendants (LYNK & CO International AB, Zeekr, Lotus and Smart Europe companies), the withdrawal of the infringement action brought by Sun Patent Trust…
Read the analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, UPC_CFI_502/2024, 2 June 2026)
By an order of 2 June 2026, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division stays infringement action UPC_CFI_502/2024 brought by Koninklijke KPN N.V. against Oleading B.V.
Read the analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, UPC_CFI_2246/2025, 2 June 2026)
By order of 2 June 2026, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division granted the joint request of KPN and Oleading and others to vary the order of 28 May 2026 (Rule 335 RoP).
Read the analysisNokia v Zhejiang Geely Group (CFI, 1 June 2026)
Read the French analysisNokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 1 June 2026)
By a decision of 1 June 2026, following a settlement reached during the written procedure, the Munich Local Division allows Nokia Technologies Oy to withdraw infringement action UPC_CFI_661/2025 concerning EP 4 090 075, and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd.
Read the analysisNokia Solutions and Networks v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 29 May 2026)
By a decision of 29 May 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permits Nokia Solutions and Networks Oy to withdraw infringement action UPC_CFI_662/2025 concerning EP 3 799 333, and Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., Ltd.
Read the analysisNokia Solutions v Zhejiang Geely Group (CFI, 29 May 2026)
Read the French analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, UPC_CFI_565/2024, 28 May 2026)
By an order of 28 May 2026 in joined infringement actions UPC_CFI_565/2024 and UPC_CFI_2246/2025 brought by Koninklijke KPN N.V. against Oleading B.V., Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp.
Read the analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, UPC_CFI_2246/2025, 28 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1791/2025, 27 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1793/2025, 27 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CFI, 27 May 2026)
By an order of 27 May 2026 in infringement actions UPC_CFI_1568/2025, UPC_CFI_1791/2025 and UPC_CFI_1793/2025 brought by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and nine other defendants, The Hague Local Division sets up a phased confidentiality regime for Ericsson's comparable licences…
Read the analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v Motorola Mobility (CoA, 26 May 2026)
By 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 analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia (CFI, UPC_CFI_362/2025, 22 May 2026)
By procedural order of 22 May 2026, following an online case management meeting held the day before, the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division amended the hearing dates in Sun Patent Trust's infringement action against three Vivo companies based on EP 3…
Read the analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia (CFI, UPC_CFI_361/2025, 22 May 2026)
By procedural order of 22 May 2026 (UPC_CFI_361/2025) the judge-rapporteur of the Paris Local Division amended the hearing dates in Sun Patent Trust's infringement action against three Vivo companies, based on EP 3 852 468: a hearing on 9 September 2026 at…
Read the analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, UPC_CFI_398/2025, 19 May 2026)
Read the French analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CoA, 19 May 2026)
By 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 analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, UPC_CFI_1321/2025, 19 May 2026)
Read the French analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, UPC_CFI_617/2024, 19 May 2026)
Read the French analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, UPC_CFI_1340/2026, 19 May 2026)
Read the French analysisBARDEHLE PAGENBERG Partnerschaft mbB v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (CFI, 18 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1793/2025, 14 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1568/2025, 14 May 2026)
By order of 14 May 2026, issued in the three infringement actions UPC_CFI_1568/2025, UPC_CFI_1791/2025 and UPC_CFI_1793/2025 brought by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) against Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1791/2025, 14 May 2026)
Read the French analysisHuawei Technologies v Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (CoA, UPC_CoA_53/2026, 13 May 2026)
By 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 analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1793/2025, 13 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CFI, 13 May 2026)
In the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_1568/2025, UPC_CFI_1791/2025 and UPC_CFI_1793/2025 (EP 2 712 236, EP 3 836 631 and EP 3 245 744), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division refuses the Transsion defendants an extension of the deadline for their non-technical statement of…
Read the analysisHuawei Technologies v Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (CoA, UPC_CoA_52/2026, 13 May 2026)
On 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 analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1791/2025, 13 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_1793/2025, 8 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion (CFI, UPC_CFI_11568/2025, 8 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Shenzhen Transsion Holdings (CFI, 8 May 2026)
Following the case management hearing of 5 March 2026, the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division directs, in the joined proceedings UPC_CFI_1568/2025, UPC_CFI_1791/2025 and UPC_CFI_1793/2025 between Ericsson and Shenzhen Transsion Holdings Co.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_539/2025, 6 May 2026)
Read the French analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTek Computer (CFI, UPC_CFI_757/2024, 6 May 2026)
In a decision of 6 May 2026 given in the joined infringement action and counterclaim for revocation (UPC_CFI_757/2024 and UPC_CFI_539/2025), the Lisbon Local Division held that ASUSTek Computer infringed Ericsson’s EP 2 819 131 (an inductor arrangement reducing oscillator coupling), which expired…
Read the analysisAdvanced Standard Communication v XIAOMI (CFI, 23 April 2026)
By order of 19 May 2026, Panel 2 of the Munich Local Division corrects, on the ground of clerical error, its order of 23 April 2026 in the infringement action brought by Advanced Standard Communication LLC against XIAOMI Inc.
Read the analysisNokia Technologies v Zhejiang Geely Holding Group (CFI, 20 April 2026)
By an order of 20 April 2026 (UPC_CFI_1291/2026), made without hearing the respondents, the Mannheim Local Division prohibits Zhejiang Geely Holding Group and Hangzhou Geely New Energy Vehicle Sales from pursuing before the Chinese courts an application for a worldwide 'interim licence'…
Read the analysisBelkin International v Koninklijke Philips (CoA, 16 April 2026)
By 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 analysisKoninklijke KPN v Oleading (CFI, 14 April 2026)
By order of 13 April 2026 (UPC_CFI_2246/2025), the judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division grants the parties’ joint request in the infringement action brought by Koninklijke KPN N.V.
Read the analysisKoninklijke Philips v TCL Industries (CFI, 9 April 2026)
Read the French analysisShenzhen Transsion Holdings v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (CFI, 7 April 2026)
By order of 7 April 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Lisbon Local Division grants the request of the four Ericsson defendants to align their time limits in the infringement action brought by Shenzhen Transsion Holdings on EP 4 123 910 (UPC_CFI_850/2026).
Read the analysisGuangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications v Koninklijke KPN (CFI, 7 April 2026)
By order of 7 April 2026, the President of the Court of First Instance grants the application of Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications and Orope Germany, defendants in the infringement action brought by Koninklijke KPN on EP 3 349 412 before the Düsseldorf…
Read the analysisAmazon.com v InterDigital VC Holdings (CoA, 30 March 2026)
In 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 analysisNokia Technologies v VIMN Germany (CFI, 27 March 2026)
By decision of 27 March 2026, the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permits the withdrawal, agreed by both sides before the close of the written procedure, of Nokia Technologies’ infringement action on EP 4 250 732 against VIMN Germany and eight…
Read the analysisNokia Technologies v Warner Bros. Discovery (CFI, 27 March 2026)
In a decision of 27 March 2026 (UPC_CFI_1390/2025), the judge-rapporteur of the Mannheim Local Division permits, with the consent of the nine Warner Bros. Discovery defendants, the withdrawal of Nokia's infringement action (EP 4 250 732), declares the proceedings closed and orders…
Read the analysisHuawei v MediaTek (CFI, UPC_CFI_1235/2025, 26 March 2026)
Read the French analysisHuawei v MediaTek (CFI, UPC_CFI_1234/2025, 26 March 2026)
In an order of 26 March 2026 (UPC_CFI_1234/2025), the Munich Local Division upholds its judge-rapporteur's decision of 27 January 2026 granting the law firm Quinn Emanuel partial, redacted access to the pleadings in Huawei v MediaTek (UPC_CFI_248/2025 and UPC_CFI_668/2025, EP 3 905…
Read the analysisNEC v Hisense Gorenje Germany (CFI, 19 March 2026)
In a decision of 19 March 2026 (UPC_CFI_717/2025), the Mannheim Local Division, acting through the judge-rapporteur, permitted NEC Corporation to withdraw its infringement action on EP 3 057 321 against Hisense Gorenje Germany and five other companies, which consented, and declared the…
Read the analysisVivo Mobile Communication v Sun Patent Trust (CoA, 16 March 2026)
By 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 analysisHuawei v MediaTek (CFI, 26 February 2026)
In a procedural order of 26 February 2026 (UPC_CFI_1235/2025, EP 4 142 215), the judge-rapporteur of the Munich Local Division amended his own order of 27 January 2026, which had largely granted the law firm Quinn Emanuel access to the parties' written…
Read the analysisKoninklijke Philips v Belkin International (CFI, 11 February 2026)
The Munich Local Division upholds the infringement action brought by Koninklijke Philips N.V. against Belkin International, Inc., Belkin B.V.
Read the analysisTelefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v ASUSTeK Computer (CoA, 26 January 2026)
Access 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 analysisSun Patent Trust v Vivo Mobile Communication (CoA, 26 January 2026)
Being 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 analysisTELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSO v ASUSTEK Computer (CoA, 26 January 2026)
Read the French analysisVivo Mobile Communication v Sun Patent Trust (CoA, 26 January 2026)
Read the French analysisHuawei v HMD Global (CFI, 19 January 2026)
Non-public details of licence negotiations constitute confidential information within the meaning of Rule 262A, and protection may be extended in advance to all future pleadings relating to those negotiations, to avoid repeated orders, each party retaining the option to seek enhanced protection…
Read the analysis