UPC_CFI_362/2025; UPC_CFI_0001786/2025 – Sun v Vivo

Expert Commentary

Settlement Facts Both parties filed an application for withdrawal, stating that they do not ask for costs. The Court The Court grants the request noting that no application for reimbursement of fees is made. Comment If the parties wished such reimbursement, they should have requested it at the same time as the request for withdrawal.

Full Decision Text

Paris Local Division UPC CFI 362/2025 UPC-CFI-0001786/2025 Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court delivered on 25/08/2026 concerning withdrawal of the action (R. 265 RoP) **CLAIMANT** 1) Sun Patent Trust 437 Madison Avenue, 35th Floor 10022 - New York - US Represented by Caroline Levesque (HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER, Paris) **DEFENDANTS** 1) Vivo Mobile Communication Iberia SL Calle Orense 58, Planta 12 C 28020 - Madrid – ES 2) Vivo Tech GmbH Speditionstrasse 21 40221 - Düsseldorf – DE 3) Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd. No. 1, Vivo Road, Chang'an Town 523866 - Dongguan City, Guangdong - CN Represented by Dr Georg Andreas Rauh (VOSSIUS, Munich) **PATENT AT ISSUE** Patent no. Proprietor EP3407524 Sun Patent Trust **COMPOSITION OF PANEL – FULL PANEL** Presiding judge & Judge-rapporteur: Camille Lignières Legally qualified judge: Carine Gillet Legally qualified judge: Andras Kupecz Technically qualified judge: Dennis Kretschmann LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS: English **DECISION** **SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS** On 13 August 2026, SUN PATENT TRUST (“Claimant” in the main proceedings) filed a withdrawal application pursuant to Rule 265 RoP in the proceedings registered under number UPC CFI 362/2025. On the same day, VIVO (“Defendants” in the main proceedings) filed an application to withdraw their Counterclaim for Revocation in its entirety in the same proceedings. The parties explain that they reached an agreement. **PARTIES’ REQUESTS** SUN PATENT TRUST's requests are as follows: - In light of the settlement between the parties, Sun Patent Trust applies to withdraw the action for infringement in case UPC CFI 362/2025. - The Defendants have already given their written consent to the withdrawal of the action and will not object. - The parties have agreed that neither party shall file an Application for reimbursement of costs. VIVO’s requests are as follows: - Defendants hereby apply pursuant to Rule 265.1 RoP for permission to withdraw the Counterclaim for Revocation in its entirety. - Claimant will agree to the withdrawal. The parties do not intend to file proceedings for costs. **GROUNDS** Rule 265 of the RoPs states that: “1. As long as there is no final decision in an action, a claimant may apply to withdraw his action. The Court shall decide the application after hearing the other party. The application to withdraw shall not be permitted if the other party has a legitimate interest in the action being decided by the Court. 2. If withdrawal is permitted, the Court shall: (a) give a decision declaring the proceedings closed; (b) order the decision to be entered on the register; and (c) issue a cost decision in accordance with Part 1, Chapter 5. The withdrawal of an action by the claimant shall have no effect on any counterclaim in the action. The Court may however refer any counterclaim for revocation to the Central Division.” Considering the parties’ applications, the Court sees no objection to permitting the respective withdrawals in the present case. The Court notes that a cost decision is not requested. The Court also notes that no application under R. 370.11 RoP for court fees reimbursement has been lodged by the parties. **DECISION** The Court orders that: 1. The withdrawal of SUN PATENT TRUST's infringement claim as regards all defendants is permitted. 2. The withdrawal of VIVO's counterclaim for revocation as regards the Claimant is permitted. 3. The proceedings in UPC CFI 362/2025 and UPC CFI 0001786/2025 are closed, and the oral hearing scheduled for 9-11 September 2026 is cancelled. 5. Notes that a cost decision is not requested, and that no application under R. 370.11 RoP for court fees reimbursement has been lodged by the parties. 7. This decision is to be entered on the register. Issued in Paris, 25 August 2026. Camille Lignières, Presiding judge and Judge-rapporteur On behalf of Carine Gillet, Legally qualified judge Andras Kupecz, Legally qualified judge Dennis Kretschmann, Technically qualified judge On behalf of the Deputy Registrar **DECISION DETAILS** Date of issuance: 25 August 2026 UPC numbers: UPC CFI 362/2025 and UPC-CFI-0001786/2025 Action type: Infringement Action with Counterclaim for revocation Application Type: Application for leave to withdraw an action (RoP 265)

Key Holdings

• Parties wishing for reimbursement of court fees upon settlement must request it simultaneously with the withdrawal request.
• If no such request is made, the Court will grant withdrawal without ordering fee reimbursement.

Tags

• Settlement
• Withdrawal
• Court Fees
• Reimbursement

Related Cases

• UPC_CFI_361/2025; UPC_CFI_362/2025 – Sun v Vivo
• UPC_CFI_362/2025 – Sun v Vivo