HAMBURG LOCAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Lukas Wosnitza, Michael Schneider, Sönke Scheltz and Désirée Heintz, Eisenführ Speiser
ent infringement proceedings, jurisdiction refused; and (b) admissibility of a request for review by the panel under Rule 333 RoP of a decision of the rapporteur upholding the opposition – request rejected by analogy with Rules 331.1 and 333.4 RoP. • Daedalus Prime LLC v Xiaomi, MediaTek v Xiaomi, MediaTek, UPC_CFI_169/2024: (a) the plaintiff’s requests for service on defendants via the designated German branch offices is dismissed, Rule 271 RoP; (b) request for extension of time limit denied, Rule 9 RoP; (c) panel review of confidentiality order, Rule 333 RoP; and (d) jurisdiction affirmed. • Ballinno B.V. v UEFA, Kinexon, UPC_ CFI_151/2024: (a) security for legal costs, Rule 158 RoP; (b) request for access to file granted, confi - dentiality interests, Rule 262.2 RoP; and (c) PI request dismissed. • Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc v Amgen, UPC_ CFI_124/2024: (a) PI request is dismissed. • Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc v Samsung Bioepis NL B.V., UPC_CFI_124/2024: (a) preliminary injunction, Article 62 (2) UPCA, Rule 209 (2) RoP, validity of the patent in suit, degree of certainty, Article 62 (4) UPCA, Rule 211.2 RoP, PI dis - missed. • Roche Diabetes Care GmbH v Tandem Diabe - tes Care, VitalAire GmbH, UPC_CFI_88/2024: (a) request to change the language of proceedings from German to English granted, Rule 323 RoP; and request for stay in relation to nullity action before the central division rejected, Rules 295 (f) and 75 RoP, Article 33 (5) UPCA.
• Koninklijke Philips N.V. v Shenzhen Yunding, UPC_CFI_516/2024: (a) PI granted. • Visibly Inc v Easee, UPC_CFI_525/2024: (a) request to change the language of pro - ceedings from German to English grant - ed, Rule 323 RoP; (b) admissibility of the managing director as defendant affirmed; and (c) security for legal costs, Article 69 (4) UPCA, Rule 158 RoP. • Malikie Innovations Ltd v Nintendo, UPC_ CFI_537/2024: (a) change of name of the defendant grant - ed; and (b) confidentiality granted, Rule 262A RoP. • Hand Held Products Inc v Scandit AG, UPC_ CFI_664/2024: (a) determination of service of the applica - tion. • Nera Innovations Ltd v Xiaomi, UPC_ CFI_173/2024 and 424/2024: (a) the defendant’s motion to dismiss the motion for leave to amend/expand the complaint after summary judgment (Rule 334 lit (h) RoP) is dismissed – the decision on amendment of the claims (Rule 263 RoP) is left to the adjudicator at the oral hearing or decision; and (b) reference to statements on combined auxiliary requests, objection of delay re - jected, Rules 30.1 (b), 32.3 and 9.2 RoP. • Lionra Technologies Ltd v Cisco Systems, UPC_CFI_58/2024: (a) Rules 9.3 and 320 RoP, subsequent extension of time limit, re-establishment of rights, reinstatement granted; and (b) admissible action is unfounded, admis - sible counterclaim for revocation is also unfounded. • Teleflex Life Sciences II LLC v Speed Care Mineral GmbH, UPC_CFI_701/2024:
36
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook