2026-09-07 - CD Paris - SprintRay v. Anonymisiert (vertr. Tjibbe DOUMA) - UPC-CFI-0002034/2025

Aktenzeichen:
UPC-CFI-0002034/2025
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat
Art:
Order
Parteien:
SprintRay Inc. v. REDACTED PARTY, REDACTED PARTY

Kernaussage: The judge-rapporteur of the Paris Central Division decided a renewed application under R.

2026-09-07 - CD Paris - SprintRay v. Anonymisiert (vertr. Tjibbe DOUMA) - UPC-CFI-0002034/2025
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.

🏛️Court of First Instance - Paris (FR) Central Division - Seat• Order
📅2026-09-07
🔢UPC-CFI-0002034/2025
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
SprintRay Inc.
Florian Oliver Gunther SCHMIDT-BOGATZKY
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Name not displayed for GDPR reasons. Represented by Tjibbe DOUMA
Tjibbe DOUMA
⚖️Generic
🌐German
🤖🇬🇧

routine
The judge-rapporteur of the Paris Central Division decided a renewed application under R. 9 RoP to change the language of proceedings from German to English in parallel non-infringement and revocation actions on the same patent. An identical application had been refused on 17 August 2026, in part because it had itself been filed in English rather than in the language of proceedings; the applicants re-filed it in German with identical grounds to remove that objection. The Court adopted the reasoning of its earlier order in full and again refused both the change of language and the auxiliary requests for written pleadings, interim conference and oral hearing in English. It departed from the earlier order on one point only: the request for simultaneous interpretation at the applicants' own cost, previously refused solely because the application was in the wrong language, was granted. The Court refused to indicate whether the appeal period against the earlier order was running, holding that it does not answer abstract questions of law and that the Court of Appeal assesses compliance with the appeal period itself.

Inoffiziell

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren