2026-09-14 - LD Mannheim - Ericsson v. Verifone et al. - UPC-CFI-0000661/2026
- Aktenzeichen:
- UPC-CFI-0000661/2026
- Datum:
- Spruchkörper:
- Court of First Instance - Mannheim (DE) Local Division
- Art:
- Decision
- Parteien:
- Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ) v. Verifone GmbH, EC Cash Direkt GmbH, Verifone Payments GmbH, Adyen N.V, Verifone Payments B.V, Verifone Sp. Z oo, Verifone Italy S.R.L, Verifone Portugal, Verifone Systems France S.A.S,, Verifone Denmark A/S, Verifone Sweden AB, Verifone, Inc., Verifone Systems, Inc
Kernaussage: The Mannheim Local Division (judge-rapporteur Böttcher) permitted Ericsson to withdraw the lead action of its three-patent series against Verifone and Adyen after a settlement, and used the occasion to rule on two fee questions.
2026-09-14 - LD Mannheim - Ericsson
v.
Verifone et al. - UPC-CFI-0000661/2026
notable
The Mannheim Local Division (judge-rapporteur Böttcher) permitted Ericsson to withdraw the lead action of its three-patent series against Verifone and Adyen after a settlement, and used the occasion to rule on two fee questions. First, the withdrawal refund was cut from the 50% of R. 370.9(b) RoP to 40% under R. 370.9(e) RoP because the intertwined conditional requests, the cross-division coordination with The Hague, an above-average confidentiality regime, a partly decided preliminary objection and the need to separate three insufficiently related patents had required more work than an early withdrawal normally does. Second, and against the claimant's submission, the Court held that 'FRAND Specific Claims', a request for a declaratory judgment that the SEP holder's licence offer is FRAND-compliant, or alternatively for the Court to determine FRAND terms, add significant value to the dispute beyond the infringement claims: unlike the incidental FRAND assessment made when a defendant raises a FRAND defence, such a declaration binds the parties once final. Its value corresponds to the economic value of the subject matter, measured like a FRAND counterclaim by the difference between the offer and the counteroffer at filing (R. 370.6 RoP), less a discount for its declaratory nature; making the injunction and corrective measures conditional on the defendant refusing a FRAND licence does not lower their value. A further discount was applied for the quick settlement, which showed the parties' differences were less persistent than they appeared. The resulting value (redacted) exceeded the pleaded EUR 3 million, so Ericsson must pay additional court fees even after the 40% refund. Obiter, the judge-rapporteur suggested that FRAND Specific Claims allocated to one action of a separated series could be shifted to a sibling action without paying the fee again if the lead patent were found not infringed.