UPC_CFI_321/2025 – AdvanSix v Troy

Court
Local Division The Hague
Date
Outcome
Granted
Sector
Other
Decision Type
PROCEDURAL

Expert Commentary

Settlement Facts 1. On 10 April 2025, the claimant lodged a Statement of claim. 2. Service to all parties was completed on 16 May 2025. 3. The parties requested a postponement of the date for the Statement of defence due to settlement discussions, and this request was granted. 4. The claimant filed a withdrawal request. 5. The defendants agreed. No cost decision was required. The Court granted the request and ordered a 60% reimbursement of the court fees to the claimant. Comment Another settlement after the Statement of claim. You wonder why parties cannot settle before having to spend money and court fees on the Statement of claim, but apparently some defendants need to be convinced that the claimant is serious. Confronted with the considerable expense of a defence and the uncertainty of achieving a victory, they prefer to settle!

Full Decision Text

The Hague - Local Division UPC_CFI_321/2025 Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 13/11/2025 CLAIMANT 1) AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. Represented by Arjan (“Claimant”) - 300 Kimball Drive, Suite 101, - Reijns a.o. NJ 07054, - Parsippany, - US DEFENDANT/S 1) Troy Chemical Company B.V. (Defendant) - Poortweg 4C, - 2612 PA, - Delft, - NL 2) Troy Chemie GmbH (Defendant) - Seligmannallee 1, - 30173, - Hannover, - DE 3) Azelis Group N.V. (Defendant) - Posthofbrug 12, Box 6, - 2600, - Antwerp, - BE 4) Azelis SA (Defendant) - Rue Gabriel Lippmann 19, - 5365, - Münsbach, - LU 1 5) Azelis Netherlands B.V. (Defendant) - Rijnerf 17, - 3861 PV, - Nijkerk, - NL 6) Azelis Benelux (Defendant) - Verlorenbroodstraat 120, - 9820, - Merelbeke, - BE Defendants 1) to 6) (“Defendants”) represented by Kevin Lamberts a.o. PATENT AT ISSUE Patent no. Proprietor/s EP3286270 AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC. DECIDING JUDGE This procedural decision is issued by the panel. REQUEST, BACKGROUND 1. On 10 April 2025, the Claimant lodged a statement of claim with the Registry of the UPC, initiating infringement proceedings before the UPC Local division in The Hague against the Defendants. The Court fees were paid, and an amended statement of claim was submitted on 16 April 2025, upon which the Registry proceeded with serving the statement of claim on all the Defendants. 2. Service on the Defendants was effected on 30 April 2025 (Defendants 1 and 5), on 5 May 2025 (Defendant 6), on 6 May 2025 (Defendants 2 and 3) and on 16 May 2025 (Defendant 4). 3. By Order of 22 May 2025 (16434/2025) the Court set the deadline for lodging of the statements of defence pursuant to R.23 RoP (and any counterclaim under R. 25 RoP) on 5 August 2025 for all Defendants. 4. Following a joint request by the parties on 1 August 2025, by Order of 4 August 2025 (ACT_16434/2025) the Court extended the deadline for lodging of the statements of defence pursuant to R. 9.3(a) RoP until 19 August 2025 for all six Defendants. No statement of defence or counterclaim has subsequently been filed. 5. On 14 August 2025, the parties requested a stay of the proceedings pursuant to R. 295(d) RoP. The Court granted the stay of proceedings by order of 15 August 2025. No final decision in this action has been made. 2 6. With the present application of 22 October 2025 (the “Application”), the Claimant requests withdrawal of the proceedings pursuant to R. 265 RoP from the date of this request. 7. The reasons for the request for withdrawal are set out in the Confidential Annex 1 with supporting information provided in Confidential Annex 2. It is apparent from the annexes that the Defendants consent to the withdrawal. 8. With the Application the Claimant further requests (i) that access to Confidential Annex 1 and Confidential Annex 2 shall be restricted to the parties and the Court under R. 262.2 RoP; (ii) reimbursement of 60% of the fixed and value based fees under i.e. reimbursement of € 96,600 (which equals 60 % of €161,000), pursuant to R.370.9(b)(i) RoP. GROUNDS FOR THE ORDER 9. Based on the request and the confidential annexes, and the consensus of the parties, the Court shall grant the withdrawal request. 10. The 262.2 RoP request to keep the unredacted Application and the complete annexes thereto confidential, is also granted because it pertains to confidential settlement information. There is no legitimate interest for third parties to access this information. The same applies to the Confidential Annex submitted with the request to stay of 14 August 2025, for which R.262.2 RoP confidentiality was requested by application of 15 August 2025, which is addressed here for efficiency reasons. 11. The reimbursement of 60% of the fees is appropriate in this case, which in effect ended after the submission of the statement of claim. 12. It is apparent from the annexes that a decision on the costs (pursuant to R.265.2 (c) RoP) is not required. DECISION 1. Case UPC_CFI_321/2025 is withdrawn with immediate effect; 2. The proceedings are herewith closed (R.265.2 (a); 3. This decision shall be entered on the register (R.265.2 (b); 4. The unredacted/confidential withdrawal request of and the Confidential Annexes 1 and 2 thereto, as well as the Confidential Annex submitted with the request to stay dated 14 August 2025, are declared confidential vis a vis the public pursuant to R.262.2 RoP; 5. The Registrar is directed to reimburse the Claimant 60 % of the court fees paid in relation to infringement action as soon as possible, which amounts to € 96,600. 3 Brinkman Edger Frank Digitally signed by Edger Frank BRINKMAN Presiding judge BRINKMAN Date: 2025.11.13 09:31:15 +01'00' Allekirjoittaja Petri Rinkinen Olavi Rinkinen Päivämäärä: 11/13/25 Legally qualified judge 9:59:47 AM Digitally signed by Kokke Margot Margot Elsa KOKKE Judge-rapporteur Elsa KOKKE Date: 2025.11.13 09:40:56 +01'00' Digitally signed by Larissa Larissa Donata Donata Hageman For the Registrar Hageman Date: 2025.11.13 10:02:03 +01'00' 4

Key Holdings

  • Claimant lodged Statement of Claim; service completed.
  • Postponement granted for settlement discussions.
  • Claimant requested withdrawal; Defendant agreed.
  • Court granted withdrawal and 60% fee reimbursement.

Tags

  • Costs
  • Court Fees
  • Settlement
  • Withdrawal

Related Cases

View original decision