2026-09-24 - LD The Hague - Philips v. Quectel Wireless Solutions et al. - UPC-CFI-0002245/2025

Aktenzeichen:
UPC-CFI-0002245/2025
Datum:
Spruchkörper:
Court of First Instance - The Hague (NL) Local Division
Art:
Order
Parteien:
Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Quectel Wireless Solutions Co. Ltd. , Quectel IOT Technologies PTE. LTD., Acceleronix B.V., Quectel Connectivity Solutions Doo Beograd, Quectel Research & Development Center Europe Co. doo Beograd-Novi Beograd, Wireless Mobility GmbH , Netprisma, Inc., Eagle Electronics Inc., Eagle Wireless Inc.

Kernaussage: The judge-rapporteur of the Hague Local Division issued a procedural order after a second case management hearing in Philips' two parallel infringement actions against Quectel and its counterclaims for revocation (UPC-CFI-0002244/2025 with CC UPC-CFI-0001450/2026, and UPC-CFI-00…

2026-09-24 - LD The Hague - Philips v. Quectel Wireless Solutions et al. - UPC-CFI-0002245/2025
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 - The Hague (NL) Local Division• Order
📅2026-09-24
🔢UPC-CFI-0002245/2025
Parteien & Vertreter
Kläger / Berufungsführer
Koninklijke Philips N.V.
Inez TEN BRINK
Roeland GRIJPINK
Beklagter / Berufungsbeklagter
Quectel Wireless Solutions Co. Ltd.
Quectel IOT Technologies PTE. LTD.
Acceleronix B.V.
Quectel Connectivity Solutions Doo Beograd
Quectel Research & Development Center Europe Co. doo Beograd-Novi Beograd
Wireless Mobility GmbH
Netprisma, Inc.
Eagle Electronics Inc.
Eagle Wireless Inc.
Rutger KLEEMANS
⚖️Infringement Action
🌐English

routine
The judge-rapporteur of the Hague Local Division issued a procedural order after a second case management hearing in Philips' two parallel infringement actions against Quectel and its counterclaims for revocation (UPC-CFI-0002244/2025 with CC UPC-CFI-0001450/2026, and UPC-CFI-0002245/2025 with CC UPC-CFI-0001453/2026). The hearing was held online and behind closed doors because confidential information was discussed. The judge-rapporteur kept the value of the dispute as already set, directed that cost specifications be exchanged before the oral hearing, and endorsed the parties' joint application that settles the mutual objections to late-filed exhibits: the submissions and expert reports stay in the file except one expert report, with page-limited further comments for each side. The order also extends the confidentiality regime endorsed on 4 March 2026 to third-party technical information on Quectel's envisaged design-around, and records that mediation may run in parallel but does not move the oral hearing dates unless the parties request this jointly.

Entscheidung teilen

Weitere Navigation
Entscheidungen
Rechtstexte
Analysen

Zu Sammlung hinzufügen

0 Einträge hinzufügen zu:

Anmeldung

Registrieren