You, me & the UPC

113 Episodes

Reverse

Case by Case | Court of Appeal rules there is no right to appeal decisions on re-establishment of rights

2026-11-0602:13

On 13 October 2026, the Court of Appeal (CoA) dismissed Rematec GmbH & Co KG’s application for leave to appeal against a Mannheim Local Division (LD) order concerning two unsuccessful applications for cost decisions. Following decisions on the merits in both LD and CoA infringement/revocation proceedings against Europe Forestry, Rematec had missed the deadlines for applications for both cost decisions. Listen to Ben Reeves' overview of the decision in this episode. If you have any feedbac...

Case by Case | Paris Local Division finds Align’s clear-aligner patent valid and infringed

2026-10-3002:50

Melissa Dix talks you through a Paris LD decision from 16 October 2026. The Paris LD held that Align’s patent relating to orthodontic clear aligners was valid and infringed by Angelalign. The Court granted an injunction covering 17 UPC Member States, together with recall, removal, destruction, information and damages. However, it dismissed Align’s arguments relating to allegedly infringing acts in the UK, holding that Align had failed to substantiate the applicable UK law and, in any ev...

Case by Case | Court of Appeal provides guidance on electronic signatures and language of proceedings in Esko dispute

2026-10-3003:38

The Court of Appeal (CoA) has confirmed the limited circumstances in which it will interfere with First Instance determinations concerning language and has also provided clarity on formalities relating to electronic signatures on filed pleadings. Tune in to hear Florence Plisner overview of the decision. If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected]. Find all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Case by Case | Düsseldorf LD clarifies limits of r.171(2) RoP.

2026-10-2302:03

Milly Wickson discussed the Inficon v Elitech decision from the Düsseldorf LD today. On 6 October 2026, the Düsseldorf LD clarified the limits of r.171(2) RoP when assessing technical evidence of infringement in Inficon v Elitech. If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, please email us at [email protected]. Find all the episodes as we release them here. Follow us on LinkedIn.

Case by Case | Court of Appeal (CoA) grants NVIDIA reinstatement following earlier CoA clarification on conditional revocation appeals

2026-10-1602:49

Sam Harvey unpacks a Court of Appeal (CoA) decision today. BF exaCQ AG and ParTec AG, the claimants in these proceedings, had brought patent infringement proceedings against the defendant, NVIDIA in front of the Munich Local Division (LD). In response, the defendant filed a conditional counterclaim for revocation of the patent in-suit, agreeing that a decision on validity would only be required if the patent was found to be infringed. If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, pl...

#box-pro-ellipsis-17944229025061{-webkit-line-clamp:2;}You, me & the UPC