2025-10-28 - LD Munich - Bf Exaqc et al. v. NVIDIA - UPC_CFI_729/2025
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC_CFI_729/2025
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Munich (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Order
- Parteien:
- BF exaQC AG v. NVIDIA Corporation a. o.
Kernaussage: ENGLISH:
2025-10-28 - LD Munich - Bf Exaqc et al.
v.
NVIDIA - UPC_CFI_729/2025
ENGLISH:
Even if no counterclaim for revocation has been filed because the time limit under Rule 23, 25 RoP has not yet expired, costs and expenses of representation associated with a (future) counterclaim for revocation must also be taken into account when determining the amount of security for costs of the infringement proceedings (continuation of Munich LD, Order of 3 July 2025, UPC_CFI_127/2024 and UPC_CFI_149/2024 – Headwater vs. Motorola).
notable
The Munich LD partially granted NVIDIA's application for security for costs under Rule 158 RoP against two claimants asserting EP 3 614 263. The court ordered Claimant 2 (ParTec AG) to provide EUR 80,500 security based on press reports evidencing severe liquidity problems, including unpaid salaries and service provider terminations. The court held that anticipated costs of a future counterclaim for revocation must be included in the security calculation even before the counterclaim is filed, and that multiple claimants bear pro rata — not joint and several — cost liability under the UPCA. The application was dismissed as to Claimant 1 (BF exaQC AG), whose financial capacity the defendants had not challenged.
Stichwörter
ENGLISH:
Security for costs; Counterclaim for revocation