2026-02-02 - LD Düsseldorf - 10x Genomics v. Curio Bioscience - UPC_CFI_658/2025

1. Costs incurred in PI proceedings are reimbursable separately, even though the decision on the reimbursability of these costs is to be taken in a uniform cost procedure following the proceedings on the merits. Therefore, the ceilings for the PI proceedings and the proceedings on the merits must be determined separately (follow up to UPC_CFI_121/2025 (LD Düsseldorf), Decision of 22 April 2025, Headnote 2 – Ortovox v Mammut). 2. If the costs of the PI proceedings are reimbursable separately within a ceiling that applies specifically to these proceedings, this also means that the costs of both the PI proceedings and the main proceedings are capped by the applicable ceiling. It is inadmissible to mix the costs of the PI proceedings with those of the proceedings on the merits, or to shift them from one proceeding to the other, even if the results of the PI proceedings may be used in subsequent proceedings on the merits. 3. In the event of partial success, the applicable ceiling shall correspond to the proportion of success of the party seeking cost recovery. Accordingly, in a first step, the reimbursable representation costs must be determined based on the quota set by the Court in accordance with Art. 69 UPCA in conjunction with R. 118.5 RoP. In a second step, the ceiling, which is also reduced in accordance with the quota set by the Court, must then be applied.

The Düsseldorf LD established that cost ceilings for PI proceedings and proceedings on the merits must be determined separately. Costs cannot be mixed or shifted between PI and merits proceedings, even if PI work product was reused on the merits. In the event of partial success, the ceiling is reduced proportionally to the success rate — first determine the recoverable costs at the success quota, then apply the reduced ceiling. Party travel expenses are 'other expenses' not subject to the ceiling.