MILAN LOCAL DIVISION Law and Practice Contributed by: Vittorio Cerulli Irelli, Lorenzo Battarino and Daniel Borgogni, Trevisan & Cuonzo
a consistent practice whereby the applicant is summoned to an ex parte hearing prior to the grant of the measure under Rule 197.4 RoP, to discuss possible limitations and implementation details of the order sought. These include, inter alia, identifying the representatives and party- appointed experts who are allowed to attend the enforcement of the order, the specific locations to be accessed, and the precise identification of the documents to be searched and collected. 3.3 Pending Cases The following cases on the merits are pending before the Milan LD at the time of writing (June 2025) (the list does not include proceedings for provisional measures and proceedings to pre - serve evidence). Oerlikon Textile GmbH & Co KG v Himson Engineering Private Limited Infringement action, filed 12 July 2023, oral hearing held on 11 June 2025 The case started after an ex parte order to pre - serve evidence that was granted by the court to seize textile machines marketed by Himson on display at a trade fair in Milan. Following enforcement of the order, Oerlikon commenced the pending merit infringement proceedings. Himson challenged the validity of the patent by way of counterclaim on grounds of added mat - ter, lack of novelty and lack of inventive step. Progress Maschinen & Automation AG v AWM Srl & Schnell SpA Infringement action, filed 15 April 2024, interim conference held on 5 June 2025, oral hearing scheduled for 16 September 2025 The patent in suit concerns a method and machine for producing lattice girders. The case started with an ex parte order to preserve evi - dence and inspection issued against AWM and Schnell. Following enforcement of the order,
procedural issues were subsequently discussed regarding the time limit to bring the following merit proceedings: the Milan LD initially revoked the ex parte order, deeming that the deadline to do so had expired; the Court of Appeal later reversed this decision, stating that the deadline to bring merits proceedings runs from access to the material obtained and not from enforcement. Following the Court of Appeal decision, infringe - ment merit proceedings have been brought and are currently pending, with a counterclaim for revocation. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Asustek Computer Inc et al Infringement action, filed 14 June 2024 The action concerns the alleged infringement of two patents covering video coding technol - ogy. A counterclaim was filed by the defendants. The details of the case are not publicly available, other than in relation to the confidentiality order adopted by the court to preserve the confiden - tiality of the licensing agreements submitted by the parties. However, it is known that on 13 March 2025 Ericsson filed a request to withdraw the action in respect of one of the defendants – Digital River – which is now no longer a party to the proceedings. Dainese SpA v Alpinestars SpA et al Infringement action, filed 7 August 2024 The action concerns the alleged infringement of two Dainese patents across the UPC territory and Spain. No public information is available on the arguments put forward by the parties, although it is known that validity of the patents has been challenged by means of a counterclaim for revocation. Notably, in the context of this case, the Milan LD issued an order rejecting the preliminary objec -
88
CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook