You, me & the UPC

On 7 April 2026, the CoA reaffirmed that a request for Security of Costs (SoC) may be made against an appellant, regardless of the party’s status as a claimant/defendant in first instance proceedings.Hannah Rigby provides a compressive overview of this decision in today's episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Jonathan Ross analyses the Milan Central Division's (CD) decision to revoke Flexicare (Group) Limited’s unitary patent EP 4 185 356 following a revocation action brought by Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Limited. Listen today.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Fariha Chowdhury is back with another UPC case update. Today, she looks at the Paris LD's decision to revoke Compagnie Générale des Etablissements Michelin’s European patent EP 2 323 858 B1 (EP 858) in its entirety and dismissed Michelin’s infringement action against three Goodyear group companies. Listen today, and don't forget to subscribe!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. (Abbott) brought proceedings against Sinocare Inc. and A. Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l. (together the Respondents) alleging infringement of EP 3 988 471, which concerns a continuous glucose monitoring system displaying real‑time glucose data together with event information.Fariha Chowdhury explores the case in detail in this episode. Don't forget to subscribe so you don't miss any UPC case updates.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 14 April 2026, the Brussels Local Division (LD) handed down an order under r.190 RoP requiring Establishment Labs S.A (LABS) to produce a range of evidence, including soft tissue implant samples and various technical and regulatory documents, within 21 days, following a successful application made by GC Aesthetics.In our 50th episode, Cassie Blackburn dives into the details of the decision. Listen today and don't forget to subscribe.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Claire Wilson takes a look at the Milan Central Division's decision to dismiss ongoing revocation proceedings between Neurocrine Biosciences and Spruce Biosciences as devoid of purpose under r. 360 RoP. If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Chloe Dickson looks at the Court of Appeal decision to uphold the revocation of an order obtained ex parte by Ecovacs against Roborock for inspection of robot vacuum cleaners at a trade fair.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Lucy Sewter explores how the CoA overturned a decision of the Mannheim Local Division (LD) that had refused Amazon permission to produce a private transcript of an oral hearing in proceedings UPC_CFI_936/2025 between Amazon and InterDigital.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 13 March 2026, the Court of Appeal (CoA) has set aside the Paris Local Division’s (LD’s) decision (dated 27 November 2025) that had dismissed the preliminary objections and accepted jurisdiction over alleged infringements occurring in several non-UPC states between Keeex and several US and Irish based defendants.Lucy Sewter explores the case in detail. Listen now.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Chloe Dickson talks you through a decision concerning EOFlow’s request for an order that certain information on the extent to which it had committed acts of infringement of Insulet’s patent be designated as confidential and withheld from public inspection.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Patrick Newlands looks at how the Düsseldorf Local Division’s (LD) application of the Huawei v ZTE factors has clarified how that LD of the UPC intends to approach the framework.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 24 February 2026, in UERAN v Xiaomi, the Munich Local Division (LD) corrected an unopposed clerical omission in its January confidentiality order by adding several missing paragraphs of the Statement of Defence. Listen to Eden Winlow in today's episode, who unpicks the decision.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Eden Winlow covers the Court of Appeal's (CoA) first ever referral to the CJEU.In which the CoA has sought clarity on the application of long-arm jurisdiction in situations involving non-EU defendants alleged to have infringed patents using the services of an EU-based intermediary, such as an authorised representative.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 24 February 2026, the CoA issued two decisions that reinforce the need for precise requests from third parties for public access under r. 62.1(b) RoP. Eden Winlow explores both decisions in this episode. Listen today and don't forget to subscribe!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 24 February 2026, the Munich Central Division dismissed TCL’s revocation action against Corning’s patent concerning methods for producing alkali free glass for display substrates. These glass sheets are used in Active Matrix Liquid Crystal Display (AMLCD) applications.Rachael Cartwright dives into the detail in this episode. Listen now!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Sam Harvey takes a look at two decisions issued by the UK Court and the UPC’s Mannheim LD in the ongoing multi-jurisdictional dispute between Amazon and InterDigital over the terms of a RAND licence to InterDigital’s SEP video codec portfolio.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Fariha Chowdhury looks at the Court of Appeals decision in Rematec GmbH & Co. KG v Europe Forestry B.V., reinstating European patent EP 2 548 648 and overturning the Mannheim LD’s earlier revocation.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Labrador initiated proceedings on 12 June 2024 by filing an infringement action against certain bioMérieux entities before the Düsseldorf LD. In response, bioMérieux UK filed a revocation action before the Milan Central Division (CD) on 30 August 2024, while other entities lodged a counterclaim for revocation within the Düsseldorf infringement proceedings.Listen to Fariha Chowdhury detailed analysis.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 9 February 2026, the Court of Appeal (CoA) dismissed an appeal from Papst Licensing GmBH & Co. KG (Papst) against a decision of the European Patent Office (EPO) rejecting Papst’s application for unitary effect. Olivia Henry explains more in this episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Milly Wickson takes a look at the decision in which the Paris CD held that ALD France S.A.S. is entitled to bring revocation proceedings against Nanoval’s patent EP 3 083 107 B1, notwithstanding the parallel infringement and revocation actions involving ALD’s German parent company and Nanoval before the Munich LD.  Listen now!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

The Court of Appeal (CoA) recently dismissed Centripetal’s appeal against the Mannheim LD’s decision (following a request for review) to revoke an earlier saisie order, on the basis that Centripetal’s request was inadmissible. Listen to Maria Ryan in today's episode for more details on the decision.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 4 February 2026, the Paris LD granted Bostik’s request that Henkel (the alleged infringer) produce evidence under Art. 59 UCPA and r. 190 RoP. The request was for current data sheets for certain of Henkel’s Loctite Liofol branded flexible laminate packaging products.Jonathan Ross explains more in this episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Luke Norton explores the Court of Appeals decision, handed down on 29 January 2026, addressing confidentiality and r. 262A RoP in the dispute between EOFlow and Insulet. Listen now and don't forget to subscribe!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 6 February 2026, The Hague Local Division (LD) granted Abbott provisional injunctions in relation to two of its Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) patents, EP 3 960 072 (the insertion device patent) (EP 072) and EP 2 720 610 (the stacked sensor patent) (EP 610).Maria Ryan dives into the details of this case in this episode. Check it out today.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 12 December 2025, the Munich LD ordered ASUS Technology Licensing Inc. (ASUS) to provide security for costs in the amount of EUR 200,000 following an application by the defendants, including Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd (OPPO), under r. 158.1 RoP. Nischay Mall dives into the detail of this decision. Listen today!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Rebekka Thomas talks you through the Düsseldorf Local Division's (LD) decision dismissing Ona Patents SL’s (Ona) infringement action against Google Ireland Limited and Google Commerce Limited (together, Google) while simultaneously upholding the patent’s validity by dismissing Google’s counterclaim for revocation.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 13 January 2026, the Munich LD granted Heraeus Reestablishment of Rights (RoR) after it missed the r. 151 deadline to apply for a cost decision, determining that the failure resulted from an excusable legal misjudgment in an unclear area of procedural law.Lucy Sewter explains more in this episode of Case by case.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Milly Wickson explores a decision handed down on 16 January 2026, where the LD upheld IMC Creations’ (IMC) patent as valid in amended form and infringed by Mul-T-Lock’s MVP1000 padlock in the UPC territory, but not in Switzerland.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

In the dispute between Microsoft Corporation and Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy, the admissibility and handling of auxiliary requests to amend the patent became the central issue after the patent as granted was found invalid for added subject-matter.In this episode, Matthew Raynor provides insight into the case.Discover more about our UPC expertise here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 13 January 2026, the Munich LD dismissed Emboline's infringement action against AorticLab with respect to its embolic protection medical device. Kate O'Sullivan explores the decision in this episode.Discover more about our UPC expertise here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

By its order dated 22 December 2025 the Mannheim Local Division (LD) continued the Anti-Interim Licence Injunction (AILI) in the InterDigital v Amazon proceedings. Nadine Bleach explains all in this episode.Discover more about our UPC expertise here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Luke Norton guides you through UERAN v Xiaomi and the request to change the language of proceedings to the language of the patent in suit (English) on grounds of fairness under Art. 49(5) UPCA.Discover more about our UPC expertise here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Patrick Newlands walks you through the Court of Appeal's decision to reject an application to stay proceedings under r. 21.2 RoP, specifically relating to staying deadlines.Discover more about our UPC expertise here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Kate O’Sullivan explores the Court of Appeal's decision in the Meril v Edwards Lifesciences appeal concerning Edwards’ patent to prosthetic heart valves.Interested in Bristows UPC expertise and insights? Click here to discover more.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 18 November 2025, The Hague Local Division (LD) held that two European patents owned by Advanced Cell Diagnostics, Inc. (ACD) were valid but not infringed by the defendant, Molecular Instruments, Inc. ACD’s patents. Maria Ryan goes into the details of this decision in this episode. Listen now!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 17 October 2025, the Munich Local Division (LD) dismissed Onward Medical N.V.’s application for a Preliminary Injunction (PI) against Niche Biomedical Inc. (trading as ANEUVO). Fariha Chowdhury explains all in this episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Belparts Group N.V. (Belparts) sought, under r.340.1 RoP, to consolidate infringement and revocation actions pending before the Munich Local Division (LD) and Paris Central Division (CD) relating to the same patent. Nicholas Round explains all in this episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On 5 November 2025, the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by Seoul Viosys Co Ltd (Viosys) against the decision of the Düsseldorf Local Division (LD) revoking its EP 3 223 320 patent for inadmissible broadening. Nischay Mall dives into the details in this episode. Check it out now!The appeal Mischay refers to in this episode can be read about here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

STEROS had obtained provisional measures against OTEC from the Hamburg Local Division, Court of First Instance (CFI), alleging infringement of EP 4 249 647. The patent relates to an electrolytic medium used in electropolishing. Nicholas Round explains all in this episode.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Nischay Mall explores the Court of Appeals decision rejecting an application by Black Sheep Retail Products BV (Black Sheep) for suspensive effect of the first-instance decision requiring it to disclose information to HL Display AB (HL) to assist in calculating damages.The first instance judgment was previously reported here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

The Milan Central Division gave its decision on the consolidated revocation actions brought by bioMérieux against Labrador Diagnostics in relation to a patent claiming an instrument for detecting a biological analyte. Ben Reeves dives into the details in this episode. Listen now!If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Rachael Cartwright talks you through the Hague LD's decision in Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.’s application for provisional measures against Sinocare Inc. and A. Menarini Diagnostics s.r.l. relating to displays for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems. Read more here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Rachael Cartwright explores The Hague Local Division's (LD) decision by default judgment in an infringement action after the defendant failed to file its Statement of Defence by the deadline in this episode. If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

On  14 October 2025, the UPC Court of Appeal addressed an appeal by Kodak against penalty orders issued by the Mannheim Local Division in an infringement action brought by Fujifilm concerning EP 3 511 174. Luke Norton gives details in this episode. Tune in! If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

The Paris Central Division has dismissed a revocation action brought by Meril Life Sciences against EP 4 141 181 (the Patent) owned by Edwards Lifesciences Corporation, but upheld Edwards’ counterclaim that the Patent was infringed by Meril’s ‘Octacor’ and ‘Octapro’ systems. Luke Norton explains more in this episode. Discover more UPC insights here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Hannah Rigby explores the UPC Court of Appeal's decision to reject an appeal filed by Roku International B.V and Roku, Inc (Roku) against several orders issued by the Munich Local Division. Read more UPC case insights here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Ben Reeves talks you through the Hamburg Local Division's decision to grant a Preliminary Injunction (PI) in Occlutech v Lepu based on Occlutech's patent for a braided occlusion device, EP 2 387 951. Of particular interest are the Court’s findings on imminent infringement, urgency and the balance of interests between the parties. Read more here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

The Local Division of the Hague upheld the validity of HL Display AB's patent for shelf dividers and found Black Sheep Retail Products B.V. (BSRP) had directly and indirectly infringed the patent. Ben Reeves explains all in today's episode. Listen now! You can also read more about this and other recent cases here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

In this episode, Naoise Gaffney looks at the Court of Appeal's decision to grant Apple's application to intervene in Sun Patent Trust’s appeal against a confidentiality order issued by the Paris Local Division (LD). Read more by clicking here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Maria Ryan looks at InterDigital's ex parte provisional measures against Amazon granted by the Mannheim Local Division, designed to protect InterDigital’s ability to pursue infringement actions before the UPC in today's episode. You can read more on this here.If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected] all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.