The Unified Patent Court 2025

MANNHEIM LOCAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Tobias J Hessel and Leonie Jüngels, Clifford Chance

3.2 Leading Cases One prominent leading case is Panasonic v OPPO/Xiaomi, which represents the UPC’s first significant decision on FRAND licensing terms related to SEPs. This case is pivotal because it tackled complex technical and legal questions on SEP infringement and the balancing of patent holders’ and implementers’ rights. The thorough claim construction, active judicial engagement and handling of FRAND defences set procedural and substantive precedents that will guide future SEP litigation under the UPC system. Another notable case is MED-EL v Advanced Bionics, involving cochlear implant technologies in the med-tech field. This dispute is recognised for its detailed exploration of technical evidence and procedural questions, particularly around expert testimony and evidence admissibility. The case helped clarify the UPC’s approach to integrating complex technical expertise within its legal framework, enhancing procedural fair - ness and efficiency in highly specialised patent disputes. Additionally, the DJI case (involving the drone manufacturer DJI as a party) illustrates the Local Division Mannheim’s engagement with cutting- edge technology sectors, such as unmanned aerial vehicles and related electronic innova - tions. This case draws attention due to its inter - national dimension and the interplay of complex patent portfolios, underscoring Mannheim’s role as a key venue for multinational patent enforce - ment and litigation strategy in relation to emerg - ing technologies. 3.3 Pending Cases Pending cases in the Local Division Mannheim are as follows:

• EP3716655 – Malikie v Discord (infringement action, pending); • EP2465265 – InterDigital v Disney(infringement action, pending); • EP1697604 – Decathlon v OWIM/Lidl (infringement and revocation action, pending); • EP3799333 – Nokia v Verifone (infringement action, pending); • EP3652914 – Centripetal v Palo Alto (infringe - ment and revocation action, pending); • EP3821580 – Centripetal v Keysight (infringe - ment, revocation and preservation of evi - dence, pending); • EP4096288 – Samsung v ZTE (infringement action, pending); • EP4050804 – Samsung v ZTE (infringement action, pending); • EP2481141 – Powermat v Anker (infringement action, pending); • EP4108413 – Sunstar v CeraCon (infringe - ment and revocation action, pending); • EP2037175 – Polidoro v Bekaert (infringement and revocation action, pending); • EP2951625 – TRUMPF v IPG Laser (infringe - ment and revocation action, pending); • EP2839403 – Fingon v Samsung (infringe - ment and revocation action, pending); • EP2746957 – Total Semiconductor v Texas Instruments (infringement and revocation action, pending); • EP3259902 – InterDigital v Disney (infringe - ment action, pending); • EP1761130 – Puratos v IREKS (infringement and revocation action, pending); • EP2831787 – Irdeto v DJI (infringement action, pending); • EP3296274 – Corning v Hisense (infringement and revocation action, pending); • EP3849157 – Wilus v ASUS (infringement action, pending);

CHAMBERS.COM