Case Reports

UPC Court of Appeal sets out criteria for evidence preservation and inspection orders Valinea Energie SASU v Tiru SAS (UPC_COA_002/2025) and Maguin SAS v Tiru SAS (UPC_COA_327/2025) Court of Appeal...

Fujifilm Corporation v. Kodak GmbH, Kodak Holding GmbH, Kodak Graphic Communications GmbH UPC_CFI_359/2023 and UPC_CFI_365/2023 Orders of 18 July 2025 The UPC has begun to shape the contours of...

Aesculap AG v Shanghai International Holding Corporation GmbH (Europe) (UPC_CFI_213/2025 relating to EP2892442B1) Order of 10 July 2025 (ORD_32728/2025 [1]) This Decision from the Düsseldorf Local...

Genentech Inc. & F. Hoffmann – La Roche AG v Organon & Co, Organon Heist B.V. NV Organon & Shanghai Henlius Biotech Inc. (UPC_CFI_407/2025 and 408/2025) Orders dated 30 May 2025 (ORD_23125/2025 and...

Nanoval GmbH & Co. KG v ALD Vacuum Technologies GmbH (UPC_CFI_63/2025 relating to EP3083107) Order of 22 July 2025 (ORD_25245/2025 [1]) This Decision from the Munich Local Division of the Unified...

Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy v Microsoft Corporation UPC_CoA_363/2025 Decision of 12 July 2025 ORD_32844/2025[1] The UPC Court of Appeal has corrected a lower court's misunderstanding...

In a significant ruling before the Unified Patent Court (UPC)[1], the Court of Appeal has clarified that a claimant in an infringement action cannot request security for costs from a defendant who...

Sichuan Yuanxing Rubber Co., Ltd. and China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, Automotive Sub Council Order of 14 July 2025 (ORD_26742/2025 [1]) This article follows up on the UPC...

Maschio Gaspardo S.p.A. v Spiridonakis Bros GP (UPC_CFI_513/2024 relating to EP1998604) Order of 25 June 2025 (ORD_17812/2025 [1]) This Decision from the Central Division of the Unified Patent Court...

NJOY Netherlands B.V v Juul Labs International, Inc (UPC_CFI_309/2023) Order issued 9 June 2025 (ORD_27305/2025) [1] The Paris Central Division revoked Juul Lab's patent EP 3 498 115 B1 by decision...

Dolby International AB v. Epson France SAS UPC_CFI_77/2025 Order of 27 May 2025 ORD_18316/2025[1] The Hamburg Local Division of the UPC has decided that a withdrawal of opt out from the UPC is valid,...

Hurom Co., Ltd v. NUC Electronics Co., Ltd, NUC Electronics Europe GmbH & Warmcook (UPC_CFI_163/2024) Order of 23 May 2025 (Order no. ORD_69293/2024[1] relating to EP 3 155 936) The Paris Local...

UPC_CFI_58/2024 Following a decision, a successful party has one month to apply for a costs decision (Rule 151). In the relevant case, the main decision (dated 19 February 2025) stated that the...

Zentiva Portugal, LDA v. Boehringer Ingelheim International GMBH (UPC_CFI_41/2025 relating to EP1830843) Court of First Instance Order dated 8 May 2025 ORD_18599/2025 [1] Summary The Application for...

Sanofi Biotechnology SAS, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.,v Amgen Inc. and others UPC_CFI_505/2024 Decision of 13 May 2025 ORD_598583/2023 This decision from the Düsseldorf Local Division sets out for...

A recent judgement in the Patents Court [2011] EWHC 907 (Pat) by the Hon Mr Justice Floyd has emphasised the importance of registering assignments and exclusive licences relating to European patents...

What is a 'Patent Box'? The Patent Box is a taxation scheme proposed for the UK. Under the Patent Box scheme companies will be able to apply a 10% rate of corporation tax for net profits arising from...

The European Patent Office (EPO) and the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which creates Information and Communication Technology (ICT) standards, have announced that they have signed an...

This judgement by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirms that when a national court acting as a Community Trade Mark Court imposes measures to ensure compliance with a judgment,...

A recent judgment made by the Chancellor of the UK High Court in a patent dispute has highlighted that the test for obviousness (i.e. inventive step) of the subject matter of a patent does not...

By Andrew Sharples, Partner and head of EIP LifeDigital Opportunity: A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth (commonly known as The Hargreaves Review) was published on 18 May 2011.

A recent judgment has clarified the consequences for a court order based on a successful UK finding of patent infringement when that same patent is later amended at the EPO.

European Court of Justice: Case C-96/09 P A recent appeal to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in relation to the ongoing trademark dispute between Anheuser-Busch and Budvar has highlighted several...

In this case the patentee Servier had obtained an injunction against the defendant Apotex for the sale of a generic copy of the drug Perindopril Erbumine.

The Court of Appeal judgment ([2011] EWCA Civ 303) in Schütz v Werit has shed some light on the appropriate test for deciding whether a given act of reconditioning of a patented product constitutes a...

A recent case in the English courts raises questions that could affect the way global business is performed over the internet. Since 1998, databases have been protected in the UK under a ‘sui...

A few years ago, Google decided to allow businesses in the US and in the European Union to buy Google AdWords consisting of their competitors' registered trademarks so that anyone can bid on a...

A recent UK court decision has concluded that, in appropriate circumstances, post-sale confusion could be used to demonstrate a likelihood of confusion when potential trademark infringement was being...

It seems a single EU patent, covering all the EU Member States other than Spain and Italy, may become a reality. How this would be litigated, however, remains unclear.

A recent High Court decision demonstrates that a post-grant amendment may still be rejected in the UK at the discretion of the court. The amendment was rejected as even though the scope of the...