2024-11-22 - LD Mannheim - Panasonic v. OPPO et al. - UPC_CFI_210/2023

Was ist diese UPC-Entscheidung?

Zusammenfassung: The Mannheim Local Division is the first UPC panel to work through the Huawei v ZTE negotiation programme in full and the first to hold the Court competent under Art. 32(1)(a) UPCA for a counterclaim seeking the determination of a FRAND licence, because the competition-law dimension of a standard-essential patent is inherent in the patent right and cannot be severed from it. It rejected the Art. 102 TFEU defence on the implementer's conduct: the infringement notice was sufficient through claim charts on a Chinese family member expressly cross-referencing the patent in suit, the initial willingness declaration was sufficient, and the SEP holder's offer was FRAND because it explained its economic parameters early, no signature-ready draft being required at that stage. The defendants withheld their own sales figures, calculated their counter-offer solely from third-party market data, offered security that would fail in insolvency and raised their substantive objections only through a court-stage expert report. The panel expressly refused a purely economic rate-setting reading of Huawei v ZTE, held that the SEP holder's offer must always be examined on its merits rather than cursorily, and departed from the UK Court of Appeal's view that a SEP is a right of monetary content alone. The patent survived every validity attack and a full set of remedies followed, including a separate Art. 67(1) and Art. 68(3) UPCA information and accounting order with document production, redaction and an auditor reservation.

Quelle und Fundstellen

Quelle: UPC Case File

Aktenzeichen: UPC_CFI_210/2023