Germany: Court Procedure

The Mannheim Local Division of the Unified Patent Court addressed a procedural application by Google LLC and Google Germany GmbH seeking to change the language of infringement proceedings from German to English under Rule 323 of the Rules of Procedure. The decision examines how a claimant's demonstrated capacity to litigate in English in comparable proceedings may outweigh traditional factors such as party size and domicile when determining language-of-proceedings applications under Article 49(5) UPCA.

The European Patent Office has released significant updates to its Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, incorporating landmark decisions that reshape how prior art is assessed, claims are interpreted, and appeal procedures are conducted. These changes reflect pivotal rulings from the Technical and Enlarged Boards of Appeal that practitioners should understand for effective EPO proceedings.

The Local Division Düsseldorf of the Unified Patent Court has confirmed a settlement agreement between OTEC Präzisionsfinish GmbH and ANCA Europe GmbH concerning European Patent EP 2 983 864. This procedural confirmation follows Rule 365(1) Sentence 2 of the Rules of Procedure, marking the formal conclusion of the dispute between the parties.

The Court of Appeal addresses whether the deadline for submitting a Statement of response to an appeal can be extended when new information becomes available after the Statement of grounds of appeal was received. This procedural decision involves an appeal between Fives ECL and REEL GmbH concerning European Patent EP 1 740 740, examining the application of specific UPCA articles and Rules of Procedure governing extension of time limits in UPC appeal proceedings.

The Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court addressed critical procedural questions in provisional measures proceedings, examining how prior knowledge of infringement allegations from parallel litigation in other jurisdictions affects the timeline for preparing objections. The court's decision establishes important precedents for balancing swift relief against the fundamental rights of respondents in cross-border patent disputes.

The Local Division Düsseldorf issued a procedural order addressing service of a statement of claim under The Hague Convention when Chinese authorities indicate a defendant refuses to accept documents. The order clarifies whether such refusal constitutes sufficient service and examines the application of Rule 275.2 RoP for immediate service without requiring alternative methods under Rule 275.1 RoP.

The Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court issued an order regarding a panel review in a patent infringement case between Advanced Standard Communication LLC and Xiaomi entities concerning European Patent EP 3 016 464. The order addresses procedural matters under Rule 158 of the Rules of Procedure and Article 69(4) of the UPC Agreement.

Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyze the Unified Patent Court's evolving long-arm jurisdiction over European Patents, examining landmark cases that define its scope and limitations. The analysis explores how the UPC can extend its reach beyond its borders to adjudicate infringement claims involving non-UPC member states, while identifying the jurisdictional boundaries established by recent Court of Appeal decisions and pending CJEU referrals.

Dyson Technology Limited has filed an application for provisional measures at the UPC Hamburg against multiple Dreame entities and distributors, involving European Patent 3,119,235. The case raises questions about jurisdiction under the Brussels I recast regulation and the interplay between UPC procedural rules and EU regulations in cross-border patent disputes.