This week, our AI hosts break down Prof. Willem Hoyng’s expert commentary on a broad set of new Unified Patent Court decisions, with a strong focus on evidence preservation, confidentiality, urgency in PI proceedings, cost recovery, and the practical consequences of UPC case management.In this episode, we cover:⚖️ Evidence Preservation & Ex Parte Measures: Key decisions on inspections, seizures, expert impartiality, security, and review of ex parte orders show how invasive evidence-gathering tools are being managed in practice.🔐 Confidentiality, Timing & Case Management: Several cases underline the importance of raising confidentiality requests, procedural objections, and narrowing issues at the right moment in the proceedings.💰 Costs, Settlements & Penalties: The week highlights recurring concerns about the UPC’s cost system, court-fee reimbursement, cost settlements, withdrawal of cost proceedings, and the use of penalty sums.⏱️ PI Urgency & Litigation Reality: Recent PI decisionsreinforce the strict approach to urgency and the commercial pressure created by immediately enforceable injunctions and difficult appeals.🧪 Validity, Infringement & Revocation Strategy: Substantive decisions address inventive step, reasonableexpectation of success, post-expiry revocation interest, infringement responsibility, and the role of auxiliary requests.📖 Read the full written analysis here: ⁠https://www.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/news-insights/detail/upc-unfiltered-by-willem-hoyng-upc-decisions-week-19-2026 🔍 Explore the case law and Unfiltered Commentaryon our UPC Intelligence Platform: ⁠https://upcintelligence.hoyngrokhmonegier.com/ ⁠Disclaimer: This post and the podcast are AI-generated. The commentary reflects Prof. Willem Hoyng’s personal views.

Ask this episode

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

Transcript

Related