UPC_CFI_26/2024 – Headwater v Samsung
- Court
- Local Division Düsseldorf
- Date
- Outcome
- Granted
- Sector
- Other
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Settlement Facts 1. On 30 July 2025, the Local Division dismissed the infringement claim and revoked claim 1 of the patent. 2. Before the time for appeal expired, the claimant withdrew its infringement claim. The defendants agreed. The Court 1. Allowed the withdrawal of the infringement claim. 2. Each party bears their own costs for the infringement action (which was agreed between the parties). 3. Set the value of the infringement action at € 3 million. Comment 1. As long as a decision is not definite, you can withdraw your claim (if the defendant agrees, otherwise you will have to fulfil the conditions of R. 265 RoP). As the term for appeal was still running, the claimant could withdraw. 2. Apparently the revocation of claim 1 is not subject of the agreement. I do not know if Headwater filed or will file an appeal, which they should be doing on 30 September at the latest.
Full Decision Text
Düsseldorf Local Division UPC_CFI_26/2024 Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court issued on 26 September 2025 concerning EP 3 110 069 B1 CLAIMANT: Headwater Research LLC, represented by the Member of the Managing Board, Mr. Dr. Gregory Raleigh, 110 North College Avenue, Suite 1116, Tyler, TX 75702, USA represented by: Dr. Michael Schneider and Jochen Ehlers, EISENFÜHR SPEI- SER, Gollierstraße 4, 80339 Munich, Germany electronic address for service: mschneider@eisenfuhr.com DEFENDANTS: 1. Samsung Electronics GmbH, represented by its CEO Man Young Kim, Am Kronberger Hang 6, 65824 Schwalbach/Taunus, Germany 2. Samsung Electronics France, S.A.S., represented by its CEO Menno Van Den Berg, 6 Rue Fructidor, CS 2003, 93400 Saint-Quen-Sur-Seine, France 3. Samsung Electronics Benelux B.V., represented by its CEOs Choon Young Park, Ji Hoon Lee and Jeewook Kim, Evert van de Beekstraat 310, 1118 CX Schiphol, The Netherlands 4. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., represented by its Chairman Mr. Lee Jae-yong, 129, Samseong- ro Yeongtong-gu Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do 16677, Republic of Korea all Defendants represented by: Dr. Martin Köhler, Hoyng ROKH Monegier, Stein- straße 20, 40212 Düsseldorf, Germany electronic address for service: martin.koehler@hoyngrokh.com PATENT AT ISSUE: European patent n° 3 110 069 B1 PANEL/DIVISION: Panel of the Local Division in Düsseldorf 1 DECIDING JUDGES: This decision was issued by Presiding Judge Thomas, legally qualified Judge Dr Thom acting as judge-rapporteur, legally qualified Judge Agergaard and technical qualified Judge Augarde. LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: English SUBJECT OF THE PROCEEDINGS: R. 265 RoP SUMMARY OF THE FACTS: The parties initially brought an infringement action and a counterclaim for revocation to the Court. By decision of 30 July 2025 the Court dismissed the infringement action and revoked the patent in suit to the extent of claim 1. Before the time period for appeal expired, the Claimant withdrew its infringement action by brief dated 18 September 2025 and requested that the parties bear their own costs. On 19 September 2025 the Defendants agreed to the withdrawal of the infringement action and to Claimant´s requested cost decision. GROUNDS FOR THE DECISION: The decision follows the parties’ jointly expressed will. According to the Court of Appeal, an application to withdraw the infringement action are admissi- ble in case there is no final decision in the action in view of a pending appeal (CoA_569/2014, Order of 24 February 2025, Dexom ./. Abbott). The same applies in cases where the time period for appealing the decision of the Court of First Instance has not yet expired. In view of the parties´ consents, they cannot be considered to have a legitimate interest in the action being appealed, and the application to withdraw the action can thus be permitted. Following the Court of the Ap- peal, the Court also considers the decision of 30 July 2025 regarding the infringement action in- cluding the decision on costs to become ineffective with the closure of the proceedings. Pursuant to R. 265.2(2) RoP, the parties bear their own costs with regard to the infringement action following the consented request of the Claimant. DECISION AND ORDERS: 1. The withdrawal of the infringement action is allowed at the application of the Claimant and with the consent of the Defendants. 2. The proceedings referred to in point 1. are declared closed. 3. This decision shall be entered in the register. 4. Each party shall bear their own costs with regard to the infringement action. 5. The value in dispute for the infringement action is set at € 3,000,000,00. 2 Issued in Düsseldorf on 26 September 2025 NAMES AND SIGNATURES Ronny Digital unterschrieben von Presiding Judge Thomas Ronny Thomas Thomas Datum: 2025.09.25 19:32:20 +02'00' Anna Digital unterschrieben von Legally Qualified Judge Dr Thom Bérénice Anna THOM Bérénice Dr. Dr. THOM Datum: 2025.09.26 12:14:24 +02'00' Digitalt signeret Legally Qualified Judge Agergaard Peter Juul af Peter Juul Agergaard Agergaard Dato: 2025.09.26 03:15:21 +02'00' Eric, Philippe, Signature numérique de Eric, Philippe, Gilles, Technically Qualified Judge Augarde Gilles, Thierry Thierry Augarde Date : 2025.09.26 Augarde 10:17:10 +02'00' Digital unterschrieben HEIKE von HEIKE BETTINA for the Sub-Registrar BETTINA ELVIRA Strysio Datum: 2025.09.26 ELVIRA Strysio 12:34:49 +02'00' 3
Key Holdings
- Withdrawal of infringement claim allowed after first instance decision but before appeal deadline.
- Parties bear own costs.
- Revocation of claim 1 seemingly unaffected.
Tags
- Revocation
- Security for Costs
- Settlement
- Withdrawal