2026-02-12 - LD Munich - Roku et al. v. Roku et al. - UPC_CFI_708/2024

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: Panel 2 of the Munich Local Division permitted the withdrawal of both an infringement action and the counterclaim for revocation after the parties settled with the Access Advance patent pool before the close of the written procedure. It confirmed that R. 265.1 RoP governs claims and counterclaims alike and that no party had asserted a legitimate interest in a decision on the merits. On costs it held that R. 265.2(c) RoP, although its wording refers only to the cost determination rules in R. 150 ff. RoP, also requires the Court to make a cost decision on the merits of costs under Art. 69 UPCA on a withdrawal, of its own motion and without any application, while a costs agreement between the parties must be taken into account. It reimbursed 60% of the court fees under R. 370.9(b)(i) RoP because the written procedure had not ended: no date had been fixed under R. 35(a) and R. 36 RoP. Finally it justified the counterclaim's value in dispute by the Administrative Committee's Guidelines of 24 April 2023, under which a counterclaim for revocation is valued at the infringement action's value plus up to 50%. The published text is internally inconsistent about the patent: the heading names EP 3 200 463 while paragraph 1 names EP 3 490 258, which is also the number given in the parallel decision of the same day in UPC_CFI_254/2024 and UPC_CFI_713/2024 (node 900002257).

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_708/2024