Week 17, 2026 – Procedural Overload, Cost Chaos, and the UPC’s Global Power Struggles

This week, our AI hosts unpack Prof. Willem Hoyng’s analysis of the latest UPC decisions, exposing procedural excesses, inefficiencies in cost proceedings, and escalating cross-border tensions in SEP litigation.In this episode, we cover:⚖️ Procedural Discipline Under Pressure: When 150+ invalidity attacks, late filings, and massive expert reports push the Milan Local Division to its limits in Prinoth v Xelom.💸 The Cost Proceedings Dilemma: Why the Court of Appeal in Guardant v Sophia had to step in after a €600,000 cost order. 🌏 Global SEP Tug-of-War: The Mannheim Local Division takes a firm stance against anti-suit tactics in Nokia v Geely, raising big questions about jurisdictional overreach and international comity. 🌐 Jurisdiction & Fragmentation: In Dainese v Alpinestars, the Milan Local Division navigates Article 8(1) Brussels Regulation - while leaving key questions on cross-border infringement unanswered. 🧪 Revocation & Auxiliary Requests: A warning from the Paris Central Division in Huntsman v BASF - if you don’t properly argue your auxiliary requests, the Court won’t do it for you. 🏛️ Forum Shopping & UPC Strategy: The Düsseldorf Local Division in Quantificare v Canfield shows how national decisions can shape UPC outcomes - and why defendants must think carefully about jurisdiction challenges. 🔐 Security for Costs in SEP Cases: The Munich Local Division in Advanced Standard v Xiaomi confirms that bank guarantees for FRAND royalties won’t shield claimants from cost security obligations. 📖 Read the full written analysis here: https://www.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/news-insights/detail/upc-unfiltered-by-willem-hoyng-upc-decisions-week-17-2026🔍 Explore the case law and Unfiltered Commentary on our UPC Intelligence Platform: https://upcintelligence.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/Disclaimer: This post and the podcast are AI-generated. The commentary reflects Prof. Willem Hoyng’s personal views