In this year-end episode, our AI hosts discuss Prof. Willem Hoyng’s take on the final UPC items of 2025. After 866 notes this year, Prof. Hoyng discusses a final two.THIS WEEK’S HIGHLIGHTS:🔹 Revocation of ex parte inspection order (Düsseldorf LD)The Court revoked an ex parte inspection/seizure order, holding that the application did not provide correct and complete information on necessity. The availability of the products via Amazon weighed against an invasive measure. Prof. Hoyng welcomes the decision as a strong signal on the duty of full disclosure in ex parte requests.(Case: Ecovacs v Roborock)🔹 Anti-suit injunction and cross-border FRAND litigation (Mannheim LD)In a decision at the intersection of UPC enforcement and UK FRAND rate-setting, the Mannheim Division issued an anti-suit injunction backed by substantial penalty payments. Prof. Hoyng analyses the Division’s reliance on “ordre public” and considers the implications for international comity and the ability to litigate in foreign forums.(Case: InterDigital v Amazon)Tune in for the final episode of the year. 🥂📖 READ THE FULL ANALYSIS:https://www.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/news-insights/detail/upc-unfiltered-by-willem-hoyng-upc-decisions-week-52-2025Disclaimer: This podcast uses AI-generated voices; minor inaccuracies may occur. The commentary reflects Prof. Hoyng’s personal views.#UPCUnfiltered #UnifiedPatentCourt #PatentLitigation #CaseLaw #WillemHoyng #LegalTech #WeDoIP #PatentLaw #UPCCaseLaw #YearEndReview

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Transcript

Related