Case Reports

Decision of 2 June 2025 (Order no. ORD_23545/2025) Ekso originally brought infringement proceedings against XSYS in respect of its EP 3 742 231 patent, relating to a method of curing photo-curable...

The Unified Patent Court has now been running for two years. To mark the occasion, we have looked at the cases and the decisions over the past two years, and share our thoughts on the current state...

Order of 25 September 2024 [1] This Order to Preserve Evidence pursuant to Art. 60 UPCA concerns a machine manufactured by the defendant that was being displayed at a 3-day trade fair.

Biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KG v Light Guide Optics Germany GmbH and S.I.A. LIGHTGUIDE International (UPC_CoA_563/2024, APL_53716/2024) Court of Appeal Order dated 24 February 2025 [1] Background...

AGFA NV v Gucci (various entities) UPC_CFI_278/2023 Decision of 30 April 2025 (ORD_598576/2023)[1] This Decision from the Hamburg LD concerns AGFA's patent EP3388490, which relates to decorating...

Fujifilm Corporation v. Kodak GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH (UPC_CFI_359/2023) Order of 2 April 2025 (ORD_598586/2023)[1] This decision is part of the litigation between...

Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd v Aiko Energy Germany GmbH and others Order of 14 April 2025[1] The Claimant brought proceedings on 23 December 2024 against Aiko Energy Germany and seven other solar panel...

Teleflex Life Sciences II LLC v Speed Care Mineral GmbH (UPC_CFI_701/2024 relating to EP2007811) Order of 21 February 2025 (ORD_ 68880/2024)[1] Application for preliminary injunction refused.

(UPC_CFI_16/2025) Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 22 January 2025 regarding the preserving of evidence This is a decision on the preservation...

Yellow Sphere Innovations GmbH, Erwin Härtwich v Knaus Tabbert AG UPC_CFI_50/2024 Decision of 10 April 2025 (ORD_68984/2024[1]) This decision from the Düsseldorf local division has a number of...

Emboline, Inc. v AorticLab srl (UPC_CFI_628/2024) Order of 16 April 2025 (ORD_9097/2025)[1] The LD Munich has recently provided some guidance on when security for costs will be available as well as...

Barco NV v Yealink Network Technology Co. Ltd. & Ors. (UPC_CFI_582/2024) Order of 21 March 2025 (ORD_68979/2024)[1] Barco is a company operating in the entertainment, enterprise and healthcare...

Accord Healthcare B.V. & Others v Novartis AG (UPC_CFI_6984/2024) Application to Intervene by Zentiva K.S. and Zentiva Portugal, LDA Order of 27 March 2025 (ORD_10348/2025)[1] The Claimants...

SSAB Swedish Steel GmbH & SSAB Europe Oy v Tiroler Rohre GmbH (UPC_CFI_640/2024) Orders of 10 February 2025 (Order nos. ORD_68941/2024[1] and ORD_65844/2024[2]) This is a decision on the...

biolitec Holding GmbH & Co. KG v Light Guide Optics Germany GmbH, S.I.A. LIGHTGUIDE International (UPC_CFI_714/2024) Order of 12 February 2025 (ORD_68717/2024[1]) On 20 November 2024, the Claimant...

Can use by a competitor of a trademark as a keyword in an advertising service, such as Google’s AdWords service, be restricted by the proprietor of the trademark? Services such as AdWords allow...

The Patent Box reaches another milestone. On the 6 December the Government will publish the draft legislation based on the public consultation in the light of its original proposals.

In Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company [2011] UKSC 51, The UK Supreme Court overturned the High Court and Court of Appeal rulings and found that a patent met the requirement of...

The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA) has ruled on the admissibility of disclaimers which disclaim subject-matter which is disclosed as an embodiment in the application as filed.

In its judgement of 18 October 2011, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has confirmed that human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) do not constitute patentable subject matter, given the ban...

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Lucasfilm v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39, has both confirmed earlier judgments as to when a three-dimensional item may not be protected by copyright as a work of...

In May 2011, a review, entitled “Digital Opportunity: A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth” (commonly known as “The Hargreaves Review”), was commissioned by the Government to assess whether...

A recent High Court judgement regarding Halliburton’s Patent Applications ([2011] EWHC 2508 (Pat)) signals a new development in the way the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) handles subject...

In a recent High Court judgement involving Samuel Smith and Cropton breweries the Hon Mr Justice Arnold stressed on the importance of mediation for resolving disputes quickly and cost efficiently.

A Court of Appeal judgment in Schutz v Werit has clarified the effect on claims for costs of failing to register an exclusive licence.This judgment is a continuation of an earlier judgment, reported...

This case raised the question of the proper interpretation of a medical use (“Swiss”) claim, and confirmed that they will generally be interpreted in the same way as a “specific use” second medical...

A recent judgement from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in case C-263/09P highlights the interplay between Community Trade Marks (CTM) and national rights.

One of the aspects arising from the judgment in Lundbeck v Infosint [2011] EWHC 907 (Pat) is the potentially narrow scope of prior use rights.

The law governing supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) is in theory harmonised within the EU. However, different interpretations have arisen with the result that there are presently nine...

The Patents County Court has handed down judgment ([2011 EWPCC 15) in a dispute between Albert Packaging Limited (“Albert”) and Nampak Cartons & Healthcare Limited (“Nampak”), regarding alleged...