VOSSIUS & BRINKHOF UPC LITIGATORS’ Post

𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐫𝐬, 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐈𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦 𝘐𝘯 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘔𝘪𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘧𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰 𝘔𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘦 & 𝘈𝘐 𝘛𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘪𝘦𝘴 (ORD_33379/2024 (https://shorturl.at/JVvXC) & ORD_27206/2024 (https://shorturl.at/pUfrh)), 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘴 𝘊𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘋𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 (R. 8.1 RoP, R. 290.2 RoP and Art. 48 UPCA). 𝘍𝘶𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦: (1) 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘋 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘴 𝘚𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 (2) 𝘚𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰’𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦 13(1)(𝘬) 𝘙𝘰𝘗. ▪ The obligation to act as an independent counsellor protects the effectiveness of the party’s right to defence in court. ▪ Lack of independence must not be assessed in an absolute sense, but must be assessed with reference to the possible harm to the interests of the party on whose behalf the professional acts. ▪ Due to the instrumental nature of the obligation of independence to protect a party’s right to an effective defence in courts, a possible violation cannot be asserted by the opposing party who has no interest in such a finding. ▪ Additionally, the claims were not supported by evidence that shows that the representative used their right for other purposes than granted. ▪ Therefore, Microsoft’s objection of inadmissibility is denied. 𝐅𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞: ▪ C̳o̳n̳f̳i̳d̳e̳n̳t̳i̳a̳l̳ ̳i̳n̳f̳o̳r̳m̳a̳t̳i̳o̳n̳ ̳(̳a̳r̳t̳.̳ ̳5̳8̳ ̳U̳P̳C̳A̳ ̳a̳n̳d̳ ̳R̳.̳2̳6̳2̳A̳ ̳R̳o̳P̳)̳: A request for the protection of confidential information involves balancing both the efficient protection of information (even from the opposing party) and ensuring open access for presenting a proper defense. In this case Suinno’s application is granted; access to the license agreements is restricted to Microsoft attorneys and Microsoft directors with a legitimate need to access the information. ▪ C̳o̳n̳t̳e̳n̳t̳ ̳o̳f̳ ̳t̳h̳e̳ ̳s̳t̳a̳t̳e̳m̳e̳n̳t̳ ̳o̳f̳ ̳c̳l̳a̳i̳m̳ ̳(̳R̳u̳l̳e̳ ̳1̳3̳(̳1̳)̳(̳k̳)̳)̳: Microsoft’s claim that the information given in the statement of claim is insufficiently concrete and specific is denied. The ‘nature’ of the order of the remedy sought, and the request to determine and award past damages (April 2019 and later) with interest are clearly indicated. ----- For more information about our UPC Cooperation, please visit our website: www.vossiusbrinkhof.eu #upc #news #unifiedpatentcourt #litigation #microsoft Brinkhof N.V. VOSSIUS

  • No alternative text description for this image
Mark van Gardingen

Patent lawyer, litigator / UPC Representative at Brinkhof and Vossius&Brinkhof

5mo

Valuable and important UPC insights!

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics