Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 OCTOBER 2024

UPC Denies Request To Extend Action To An Additional Party

Marks & Clerk
Marks & Clerk
Contributor
Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk

Marks & Clerk LLP was founded in 1887 by George Croydon Marks, who was joined in partnership by...

View firm profile
Explore more from Marks & Clerk

The Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) rejected Panasonic's application to extend its patent infringement case against OPPO and OROPE to include OTECH, citing procedural delays and Panasonic's filing delays. The decision emphasized timely action and procedural efficiency.

United KingdomIntellectual Property

In a procedural order issued on 2 September 2024, the Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) rejected Panasonic Holdings Corporation's application to extend its patent infringement case against Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp. Ltd. and OROPE Germany GmbH to include OTECH Germany GmbH.

Panasonic initially filed an infringement action against OPPO and OROPE on 4 August 2023. OROPE, which provides marketing and administrative support for both OPPO and OTECH, had temporarily managed smartphone sales for OTECH in 2020 before fully transferring this business line to OTECH later that year.

In February 2024, Panasonic accessed OROPE's 2020/2021 annual report, which had been available online since August 2023. The report revealed OTECH's role in OPPO's sales activities, leading Panasonic to believe OTECH should also be included in the infringement proceedings. On 5 June 2024, Panasonic applied to the UPC to extend the case to OTECH.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from