Case Reports

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...

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...

The Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Babek International Ltd’s trade mark after Iceland Foods Ltd challenged its registration. The judgment clarified that a trade mark must be a single, clearly and precisely represented sign capable of distinguishing goods or services. The court found that Babek’s mark met these requirements, rejecting arguments about lack of clarity and permissible variations. Iceland’s appeal was dismissed, affirming the trade mark’s validity and providing guidance on interpreting trade mark descriptions and representations.

Boehringer Ingelheim successfully obtained another interim injunction from the UK High Court against Dr Reddy, reinforcing its patent rights in ongoing pharmaceutical litigation. The article outlines the case details, the court’s reasoning, and what this decision means for patent enforcement in the UK.

Summary A recent EPO Boards of Appeal decision, T 0136/24, has examined the issue of "reasonable expectation of success" when the prior art discloses a protocol to an ongoing phase 3 clinical trial.

In the recent Decision T 2387/22, the Board's key message was: if you define an invention by a "relative improvement" of a known technical effect, the improvement must be expressed in "objectively...

On 2 July 2025, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) issued its landmark decision in case G 1/23 (Solar Cell Sealing Materials and Solar Cell Module), a ruling that has...

Jeff Gosling Limited ("JGL") sued Autochair Limited in the IPEC for a declaration of non-infringement concerning its "Apex Assist" hoist and Autochair's patent, which covers a particular set-up of a...

Bargain Busting Ltd v Shenzhen SKE Technology Co Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 1239 (Ch) Summary This judgment concerns an application by the first Defendant for an interim injunction to restrain the...

On April 30, 2025, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) released a draft amendment of the Patent Examination Guidelines (for public comment), proposing further revisions to...

Following hot behind the interim injunction decisions regarding the same subject matter between AstraZeneca and Glenmark (and covered previously in this newsflash here), on 28 April 2025, the High...

AstraZeneca v Glenmark has seen the parties visiting the courts several times since the validity trial (heard in March of this year) over the past few weeks.

DW Windsor Ltd v Urbis Schreder Ltd [2025] EWHC 563 (IPEC) (14 March 2025) Summary This action involves two companies that design, manufacture and supply exterior lighting fixtures.

Babek International Ltd v Iceland Foods Ltd [2025] EWHC 547 (IPEC) https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/IPEC/2025/547.html This case concerns a trade mark held by Babek International Ltd which they...

His Honour Judge Hacon has found that Prevayl's patent for a smart bra was invalid for obviousness over two pieces of prior art. However, had the patent been valid, Whoop would be indirectly...

In T 0458/22 (which has a "B" distribution code indicating it is significant enough to be distributed to all Members of the EPO's Technical Boards of Appeal), the Board of Appeal appears to have gone...

Dainese S.p.A. v. Alpinestars S.p.A., Alpinestars Research S.p.A., Omnia Retail S.r.l., Horizon Moto 95 – Maxxess Cergy, Zund.Stoff Augsburg/Ulrich Herpich E.K., Motocard Bike S.I.