Case Reports

Panasonic Holdings Corporation v Xiaomi Inc et al UPC_CFI_218/2023, 219/2023 and 223/2023 Orders of 6 May 2024[1] Panasonic has sued multiple defendants from the Xiaomi group of companies for patent...

AIM Sport Vision v Supponor UPC_CoA_500/2023 Order of 26 April 2024 (ORD_23089/2024) There has been confusion in some of the first instance divisions of the Unified Patent Court as to whether certain...

Daedalus Prime v. Xiaomi and others Order of 18 April 2024 ORD_20986/2024[1] Daedalus Prime LLC filed a patent infringement action based on EP2792100 at the UPC local division in Hamburg.

In recent months the Local Divisions of Mannheim, Paris and Düsseldorf have given guidance on access to confidential material. These judgments address the procedure for protecting confidential...

Progress Maschinen & Automation AG v AWM Srl and Schnell S.p.A (UPC_CFI_286/2023 and 287/2023) Order dated 8 April 2024 (ORD_9710/2024)[1] Progress Maschinen & Automation AG ("PMA") filed...

Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd v Netgear Inc & Ors (UPC_CFI_9/2023) Order[1] of Court of Appeal on 11 March 2024 (UPC_CoA_44/2024); Appeal against ORD_593106/2024 of the CFI panel dated 18 January...

Juul Labs International, Inc. v. NJOY Netherlands B.V. (UPC_CoA_433/2023, UPC_CoA_435/2023, UPC_CoA_436/2023, UPC_CoA_437/2023, UPC_CoA_438/202)[1] Orders of 3 April 2024 (ORD_598223/2023,...

Meril Italy v Edwards Lifesciences UPC_CFI_255/2023 (Revocation action at Paris Central Division) Order of 28 February 2024 (ORD_7283/2024)[1] This order relates to the action brought by Meril Italy...

Procedural order of 1 March 2024 (UPC_CFI_397/2023) As previously mentioned, C_KORE Systems Limited ("C_KORE") is the proprietor of the patent EP 2265793 relating to the testing of subsea apparatus...

Seoul Viosys., Ltd v Laser Components SAS (UPC_CFI_440/2023) Order dated 12 February 2024 (ORD_3311/2024) In this infringement case before the Paris Local Division the defendant, Laser Components...

Plant-e Knowledge B.V. & Plant-e B.V v. Arkyne Technologies S.L. (UPC_CFI_239/2023) Order delivered on 13 February 2024 (ORD_586897/2023) Background The proceedings in this case are an infringement...

10X Genomics, Inc. v Nanostring Technologies Inc. & Ors (UPC_CFI_2/2023; UPC_CoA_335/2023) Order of Court of Appeal on 26 February 2024 On 19 September 2023, the Munich Local Division issued a...

In the first ever public hearing of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court, the provisional injunction obtained by 10x Genomics against NanoString during first instance proceedings has been...

ITCiCo Spain S.L. v Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaf (UPC_CFI_412/2023) Order dated 9 February 2024 (ORD_4804/2024) Background A revocation action was brought in the Paris Central Division...

Ocado v Autostore – appeal on access to documents UPC_CoA_404/2023 Order of 8 February 2024[1] In the Appeal by Ocado against the Order[2] from the Nordic Baltic regional division granting a request...

Alibaba is the largest e-commerce platform in China, and one of the biggest in the world. Its co-founder, Jack Ma, is the richest man in China; he is often compared to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs by...

In a recent decision of the UK Intellectual Property Office, an applicant for a UK patent was allowed to file a response to an examination report (“office action”) more than 18 months after the due...

In August 2013, I produced a short commentary regarding the decision of Mr Recorder Meade QC in SDL Hair Ltd v Next Row Ltd & Ors [2013] EWPCC 31, where Mr Meade was faced with the question of...

A decision from Mr Justice Birss inAdaptive Spectrum And Signal Alignment Inc v British Telecommunications Plc[2014] EWHC 4194 has introduced additional complications for parties found to infringe a...

C‑11/13 Bayer CropScience AG v Deutsches Patent- und MarkenamtThe Court of Justice of the European Union rules that a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) can be granted in respect of a safener.

A strong brand, and trademark protection, create business value. Indeed, intellectual property can become a company’s most valuable asset. Branding in sport is big business.

The question presented in Alice was whether claims directed to a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating “settlement risk” are patent eligible under 35 U. S. C. §101.

In the latest decision of a long-running battle over use of the trademark “youview”, the High Court issued a decision, this week, that may require the £100 million internet television service to...

UK Intellectual Property law was enhanced last week when the Intellectual Property Act 2014 (IP Act) was given Royal Assent. It is expected that the IP Act’s provisions will start to come into force...

The UK Intellectual Property Office has refused to grant an SPC for a medical device, as noted in the decision BL O/141/14. Whilst those aware of the SPC legislation may not find this surprising, a...

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales has highlighted again the importance of the form and amount of detail shown in the views (formally called “representations”) of a design...

In Cosmetic Warriors Limited & Lush Limited v Amazon.co.uk Limited & Amazon EU SARL, Mr John Baldwin QC (sitting as deputy judge) found that the aforesaid Amazon companies (collectively referred to...

In Hearst Holdings Inc & Anor v A.V.E.L.A. Inc & Ors [2014] EWHC 439 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss held that A.V.E.L.A. Inc. and its co-defendants (together “AVELA”) have infringed Hearst Holdings Inc.

Roger Wyand QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) recently handed down judgment in Comic Enterprises Limited v Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation [2014] EWHC 185 (Ch).

Case law on the European Patent Office’s approach to non-technical inventions is quite a minefield. This is particularly so in relation to inventions that involve a presentation of information.