UPC_CFI_54/2024; 396/2024 – Headwater v Samsung
- Court
- Local Division Munich
- Date
- Outcome
- Granted
- Sector
- Electronics/SEP
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Different workflows Background Headwater lodges three different requests: 1. review of a case management order; 2. amendment of the claims of the patent; 3. amendment of the relief sought. The Court had Samsung given 10 days to respond. Samsung requested a three-day extension, to which Headwater agreed. The Court Agrees and grants the extension but asks parties not to submit the same request across different workflows in the future, as this multiplies the Court’s workload. Comment In the CMS system, you need to use a different workflow for each distinct request. It is therefore not illogical that, since the request for extension pertained to all three requests, Samsung filed the same request in all three workflows. The Court now asks parties not to do this, which is also understandable. It all highlights that the CMS is unsatisfactory and burdensome for both users and judges. Let us hope the new CMS will make life easier!
Full Decision Text
Procedural Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Local Division Munich issued on 1 April 2025 CLAIMANT Headwater Research LLC, 110 North College Ave., Suite 1116 - 75702 - Tyler, Texas - US represented by: Representative Thomas Adam, 110 North College Ave., Suite 1116 - 75702 - Tyler, Texas - US DEFENDANT Samsung Electronics GmbH, Am Kronberger Hang 6 - 65824 - Schwalbach – DE represented by: Representative Denise Benz, Maximilianstraße 35 - 80539 - Munich - DE Samsung Electronics France S.A.S, 6 Rue Fructidor - 93400 - Saint-Ouen-sur-Seine – FR represented by: Representative Denise Benz, Maximilianstraße 35 - 80539 - Munich - DE Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., 129, Samsung-ro - 16677 - Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do – KR represented by: Representative Denise Benz, Maximilianstraße 35 - 80539 - Munich - DE PATENT AT ISSUE European patent n° 2 391 947 Local Division Munich UPC_CFI_54/2024 UPC_CFI_396/2024 UPC_CFI_54/2024 UPC_CFI_396/2024 2 PANEL/DIVISION Panel 1 of the Local Division Munich DECIDING JUDGE/S The order was made by Presiding Judge Dr. Matthias Zigann, acting as Judge-Rapporteur. LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS English SUBJECT-MATTER Application to review a case management Order (RoP333) - App_13435/2025 UPC_CFI_54/2024 and App_13434/2025 UPC_CFI_396/2024 Generic Application (R 30.2) - App_13924/2025 UPC_CFI_396/2024 Application for leave to change claim or amend case/pleading (RoP263) - App_13925/2025 UPC_CFI_54/2024 Here: Generic applications for a term extension (R 9) - App_15347/2025 and App_15353/2025 UPC_CFI_396/2024; App_15348/2025 and App_15349/2025 UPC_CFI_54/2024 REQUESTS BY THE PARTIES Samsung had been invited to file comments to the three above-mentioned requests within 10 days. Samsung requests with Headwater`s consent: that the term set by the court pursuant to ORD_14251/2025, ORD_14252/2025, ORD_14253/2025 and ORD_14254/2025 for filing comments on the following submissions by Claimant • Application to review a case management Order (R. 333 RoP) - App_13435/2025 UPC_CFI_54/2024 and App_13434/2025 UPC_CFI_396/2024, • Generic Application (R 30.2 RoP) - App_13924/2025 UPC_CFI_396/2024 and • Application for leave to change claim or amend case/pleading (R. 263 RoP) - App_13925/2025 UPC_CFI_54/2024, currently expiring on 3 April 2025, be extended until 8 April 2025. UPC_CFI_54/2024 UPC_CFI_396/2024 3 ORDER 1. The request is granted. 2. The four workflows are considered closed. INFORMATION ABOUT REVIEW BY PANEL Any party may request that this Order be referred to the panel for a review pursuant to R. 333 RoP. Pending review, the Order shall be effective (R. 102.2 RoP) INFORMATION ABOUT DECISION BY DEFAULT Should a party fail to comply with the present Order within the time period specified, a decision by default may be given in accordance with R. 355 RoP (R. 103.1, last subparagraph and .2 RoP). INSTRUCTIONS TO THE PARTIES Launching four different workflows for the same request for extension is unnecessary. It creates more work for the parties and the court and should not be done. DETAILS OF THE ORDER Order no. ORD_15869/2025 in ACTION NUMBER: ACT_7603/2024 UPC number: UPC_CFI_396/2024 Action type: Infringement Action Related proceeding no. Application No.: 15347/2025 Application Type: Generic procedural Application Dr. Zigann Presiding Judge
Key Holdings
- The Court granted a three-day extension for Samsung to respond to Headwater's three different requests (review of CMO, claim amendment, relief amendment).
- The Court advised parties against submitting the same request across different workflows in the CMS system to avoid multiplying workload.
- The commentator highlights the burden of the current CMS system for both users and judges.
Tags
- CMS
- Case Management
- Extension of Time
- Pleadings
- Procedural Issues