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 production, opt-outs, late-filed submissions, preliminary injunctions, confidentiality, and the practical realities of UPC litigation.In this episode, we cover:📄 Evidence Production, Access & Confidentiality: Several decisions address R. 190 RoP evidence requests, access to pleadings and evidence, confidentiality on appeal, public access to court files, and the limits of UPC evidence production compared with general discovery.⚖️ Opt-Outs, Costs & Procedural Discipline: The week highlights important rulings on opt-out withdrawal, cost recovery, late-filed submissions, auxiliary requests, intervention, enforcement steps, and the UPC’s continued insistence on front-loaded litigation.⏱️ Preliminary Injunctions, Urgency & Validity: Recent decisions examine PI urgency, added matter, claim interpretation, central limitation proceedings, validity attacks, ex parte procedural issues, and the need for patentees to act promptly and substantiate their case.📖 Read the full written analysis here: HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER: UPC Unfiltered, by Willem Hoyng – UPC decisions week 27, 2026🔍 Explore the case law and Unfiltered Commentary on 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