2026-08-03 - CoA - Xiaomi et al. v. Xiaomi et al. - UPC_CoA_692/2025

Aktenzeichen:
UPC_CoA_692/2025
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)
Art:
Decision
Parteien:
Nera Innovations Ltd. v. Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., Xiaomi Inc., Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V., Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH

Kernaussage: The Court of Appeal allowed the withdrawal of two cross-appeals against a Hamburg Local Division decision that had dismissed the infringement action and revoked the patent beyond the scope of two auxiliary requests, and declared the proceedings closed.

2026-08-03 - CoA - Xiaomi et al. v. Xiaomi et al. - UPC_CoA_692/2025
Eine Entscheidung, mehrere Aktenzeichen

Das Gericht hat diese Verfahren zusammen entschieden und dasselbe Dokument in jedem davon eingestellt. Jeder Eintrag unten ist ein eigener vollwertiger Registereintrag.

  • UPC_CoA_692/2025 (Sie lesen diesen hier) Text zuerst hier gespeichert
  • UPC_CoA_854/2025
🏛️Court of Appeal - Luxembourg (LU)• Decision
📅2026-08-03
🔢UPC_CoA_692/2025
Parteien & Vertreter
UPC_CoA_692/2025
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Nera Innovations Ltd.
Thomas ADAM
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd.
Xiaomi Inc.
Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.
Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH
Eva ACKER
UPC_CoA_854/2025
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Xiaomi Inc.
Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd.
Xiaomi Technology Germany GmbH
Xiaomi Technology Netherlands B.V.
Eva ACKER
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Nera Innovations Ltd.
Thomas ADAM
⚖️Appeal
🌐German
🤖🇬🇧

routine
The Court of Appeal allowed the withdrawal of two cross-appeals against a Hamburg Local Division decision that had dismissed the infringement action and revoked the patent beyond the scope of two auxiliary requests, and declared the proceedings closed. R. 265 RoP, which permits a claimant to withdraw its action before a final decision, applies to the withdrawal of an appeal as well, following the Court of Appeal's decision in Black Sheep v HL Display. Withdrawal is allowed on the application of each appellant with the consent of the respondent where no opposing interest of the respondent is apparent, which was the position here because the parties had settled out of court. Although R. 265.2(c) RoP provides that a costs decision under Part 1, Chapter 5 of the Rules of Procedure is to be made, the Court held that no such decision was needed because both parties had agreed to make no cost applications.

Inoffiziell

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren