IP Cases & Articles
How to mitigate the risk of central revocation: want to avoid committing to a unitary patent? Here’s how to say “it’s not UPC, it’s me”
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) can be a valuable tool for patent proprietors. A shiny new unitary patent, unlike a classic European patent granted by the European Patent Office (EPO), provides uniform protection rather than a collection of national patent…
The threshold of synergy: when a combination becomes more than a mere aggregation before the UPC
Two recent decisions from the Unified Patent Court (UPC), Promosome v BioNTech/Pfizer and Maxell v Samsung, shed light on how the UPC evaluates the inventive step of claims containing multiple distinguishing features. While the UPC has not expressly adopted the…
Added matter at the UPC: a sticky situation
Two recent Unified Patent Court cases may have some implications for future added matter issues heard before the UPC, and in particular those concerning alleged intermediate generalisation. The decisions in both cases are also noteworthy when compared with EPO (European…
How far does UPC Local Division jurisdiction extend? Sinocare v Abbott Diabetes Care clarifies non-European manufacturer risk
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Court of Appeal upheld The Hague Local Division’s decision to award a preliminary injunction preventing the Chinese manufacturer Sinocare, and its European distribution partner Menarini Diagnostics, from selling its continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device “GlucoMen…
UPC time limits: when procedural deadlines can be extended
The Rules of Procedure of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) allow for judges of the court to use their discretion in granting extensions for almost all time periods. Requests for extensions may often not be granted by the UPC, and…
Defining the UPC’s long arm: Fujifilm v Kodak
Patent litigation in Europe has historically operated along strictly territorial lines. However, this changed when the Unified Patent Court (UPC) opened its doors in June 2023, enabling an infringement action to be initiated that would have effect in every participating…
Computer-implemented inventions: UPC Court of Appeal endorses COMVIK approach
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Court of Appeal has provided highly anticipated clarity on how it will assess inventive step for computer-implemented inventions (CIIs). In the recent decision Abbott v Sinocare (UPC_CoA_901/2025), the court explicitly endorsed the European Patent Office’s…
All due care: re-establishment of rights at the UPC
There have now been a number of cases heard before courts of the UPC concerning missed time limits and subsequent requests for re-establishment of rights.
UPC cases TCL v Corning and WIRPLAST v VILPE: realistic starting point for inventive step
In November 2025 in the landmark and coordinated decisions Amgen v Sanofi (UPC_CoA_528/2024) and Meril v Edwards (UPC_CoA_464/2024) the UPC set out its definitive test for the assessment of inventive step.
UK High Court and UPC diverge: contrasting rulings in parallel infringement and revocation actions
On 18 November 2025 the UPC released its decision on an infringement action brought by Advanced Cell Diagnostics Inc , a subsidiary of Bio-Techne, against Molecular Instruments Inc. Molecular Instruments counterclaimed for the revocation of the two European patents that…
Ona Patents v Google: UPC places strong emphasis on procedural economy and a “front-loaded” approach
The Unified Patent Court (UPC)’s Düsseldorf Local Division has dismissed a direct infringement claim brought by Ona Patents against Google Ireland Ltd and Google Commerce Ltd (“Google” collectively) in respect of the French and German parts of EP2263098 , while…
Page 1 of 17
Next Page