Case Reports
UPC Case Reports
UPC refuses extension of deadline for review of seizure order after refusal of service
22 July 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Time limits
UPC grants ‘in absentia’ permanent injunction on agricultural tool
21 July 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Permanent injunction
Applying Ocado, the UPC grants a R262 request to access CFI documents
09 July 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Access to documents
UPC decides that the formalities of withdrawal of opt out do not matter
03 July 2025
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,...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Jurisdiction
#
Opt out
Paris Local Division rules on validity of juicer patent, scope of R. 19 RoP
27 June 2025
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
#
Recent cases
Lionra Technologies Ltd. v Cisco Systems GmbH and Cisco Systems, Inc.
25 June 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Costs
#
Other procedural aspects
#
Time limits
Provisional Injunction Denied for Small Molecule Kinase Inhibitor
19 June 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
UPC Opines on Second Medical Use Claims
17 June 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Claim interpretation
XSYS Germany GmbH & ors. v. Esko-Graphics Imaging GmbH
17 June 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
The UPC two years on: Withdrawals of actions becoming prominent
09 June 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Analysis
Data Detection Technologies Ltd v Doytec Automation Ltd UPC_CFI_554/2024
23 May 2025
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.
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
Court of Appeal Upholds Decision on Provisional Measures
20 May 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
AGFA fails in its infringement claim against Gucci
15 May 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Claim interpretation
#
Infringement
#
Revocation
Printing plates case displays practical points to consider in Fujifilm V Kodak
09 May 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
Security for Costs Order granted against party who acknowledge they were operating in a very difficult market
09 May 2025
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...
#
UPC
#
Recent cases
#
Security for costs
Other Case Reports
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Seriously deficient disclosure process not sufficient to reopen costs order - Cabo v MGA
08 April 2026
A High Court decision highlighting the consequences of inadequate disclosure searches under PD57AD and reaffirming that costs orders are final, even where later failures come to light.
No items found.
Litigants in person and IP risk: Lessons from Banham v Rogers
26 March 2026
The High Court’s judgment in Banham v Rogers provides a stark warning for SMEs defending intellectual property claims without professional advice. Acting as a litigant in person, the defendant misunderstood key technical issues, failed to comply with procedural requirements, and mismanaged correspondence and evidence. These cumulative errors left the court with no realistic defence to consider, leading to summary judgment and public reputational damage. The case underlines the importance of obtaining specialist IP advice at an early stage to avoid avoidable and compounding litigation risks.
No items found.
Court of Appeal gives Babek’s trade mark a gold star for validity
18 December 2025
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.
#
Appeal
Another day, another interim injunction granted by the UK High Court: Boehringer Ingelheim find success against Dr Reddy
04 December 2025
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.
#
Basic
Does an ongoing phase 3 clinical trial and its published protocol suggest that the tested drug will be successful?
18 September 2025
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.
#
EPO
When “better” isn’t good enough under Art. 84 EPC
18 September 2025
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...
#
Stratiphy
#
Life
#
Patenting
#
EPO
A Cloud of Uncertainty: Implications of G 1/23 for Software Companies
29 July 2025
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...
#
Codiphy
#
Digital
#
EPO
Patent Dispute Resolved: JGL's Hoist Not Infringing
25 July 2025
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...
#
Litigation
Balancing Free Speech and Fair Competition: How Section 12(3) HRA Applies to Threats
11 July 2025
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...
#
Litigation
AI and Bitstreams at the Core of China’s Patent Update
28 May 2025
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...
#
Analysis
Plausibility at the forefront of the UK High Court’s decision in finding AstraZeneca’s patent covering blockbuster diabetes drug invalid
20 May 2025
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...
#
Litigation
Court of Appeal overturns High Court’s decision and grants interim injunction to AstraZeneca against Glenmark
14 May 2025
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.
#
Litigation
Urbis Schreder slips up on anti-climb lighting patents validity challenge
14 April 2025
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.
#
Litigation
Hacon J warns that the reasonable reader should not be regarded as an “anxious pedant”
10 April 2025
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...
#
Litigation
Prevayl v Whoop [2025] EWHC 399 (IPEC)
26 March 2025
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...
#
Litigation
Stay in the Know
The UPC Newsletter
Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.