2026-04-02 - LD The Hague - Dolby v. Acer et al. - UPC-CFI-0001536/2025

Aktenzeichen:
UPC-CFI-0001536/2025
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division
Art:
Order
Parteien:
Dolby International AB v. CPYou B.V. / Acer et al.

Kernaussage: The judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division issued a preliminary order setting out his intended summary of the case management hearing held on 23 February 2026 in a standard-related infringement action, giving the parties two days to comment.

2026-04-02 - LD The Hague - Dolby v. Acer et al. - UPC-CFI-0001536/2025
🏛️Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division• Order
📅2026-04-02
🔢UPC-CFI-0001536/2025
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Dolby International AB
Tilman MUELLER
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
CPYou B.V.
Acer Italy SRL
Acer Computer GmbH
Acer Computer B.V Benelux
Acer Denmark A S
Acer Finland Oy
Acer Computer France
Acer Sweden AB
Rosalie Erna Marie TEN WOLDE
Sven KRAUSE
Klaus HAFT
Roeland GRIJPINK
Hsueh-Yen LIN
Sabine AGÉ
⚖️Infringement Action
🌐English

routine
The judge-rapporteur of The Hague Local Division issued a preliminary order setting out his intended summary of the case management hearing held on 23 February 2026 in a standard-related infringement action, giving the parties two days to comment. The hearing was conducted online and behind closed doors because confidential information was discussed, and a final part was also confidential vis-à-vis the patent pool administrator, whose redaction was to be handled by the firm acting for both the claimant and the administrator. The judge-rapporteur urged the parties to continue licence negotiations and offered a preliminary opinion on sticky points. The claimant reported that its earlier UPC cases concerned video codecs, that a parallel Düsseldorf case on the same standard might serve as a FRAND benchmark, and that the patent in suit is not subject to a FRAND declaration although it belongs to the pool, which it said affects the applicability of the Huawei v ZTE framework. The defendants are considering a rate-setting counterclaim against the pool administrator and applied on 3 February 2026 to add it as a party; the administrator accepts intervener status but disputes that R. 305 RoP allows it to be made a party against whom a counterclaim can be brought, and that dispute was left to the submission due on 9 March 2026. The operative part orders only that the case proceed under the Rules of Procedure and that the claimant file that submission.

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren