UPC_CFI_57037/2024 – SharkNinja v Dyson
- Court
- Central Division Milan
- Date
- Outcome
- Settled
- Sector
- Other
- Decision Type
- SETTLEMENT
Expert Commentary
Settlement Order The case was settled after the Statement of Claim and an earlier granted request of claimant to suspend the case because parties had reached agreement. The court allows withdrawal and declares the proceedings closed. Comment This case is a genuine R. 265 RoP case because only the claimant asked for withdrawal of the case. Although R. 265 RoP is not mentioned, the Court followed R. 265 RoP and checked if the defendant had a legitimate interest in continuing with the case (R. 265.2 RoP) by sending a draft order (in which the withdrawal was allowed) to the defendant for comments. When the defendant did not respond, the final order was issued. In my opinion the correct way to deal with it. You only wonder why Dyson did not indicate from the start that it agreed. It would have avoided unnecessary work for the Court.
Full Decision Text
1 UPC 57037/2024 App 5729/2025 App 5962/2025 ORDER of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court Central Division Milan issued on 27 February 2025 REFERENCE CODE ECLI: Not provided CLAIMANT: SharkNinja Italy S.R.L., Via Tortona 33 – CAP 20144 – Milano – Italy represented by Caroline Horstmann, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer DEFENDANT: Dyson Technology Limited, Tetbury Hill – SN16 0RP – Malmesbury, Wiltshire – Great Brittain represented by Constanze Krenz, DLA Piper UK LLP PATENT AT ISSUE: EP 2043492, proprietor Dyson Technology Limited DECIDING JUDGES: FULL PANEL: Presiding judge – Andrea Postiglione Legally qualified judge and judge-rapporteur – Marije Knijff Technically qualified judge – Pascal Weber LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS: English SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE PROCEEDINGS: Claim for revocation 2 GROUNDS FOR THE ORDER With letter dated 21 Oktober 2024 Claimant filed a substantiated request for revocation of European Patent EP 2043492 with the UPC Central Division Milan. On january 3rd 2025, Claimant filed a request to stay proceedings pursuant to Rule 295 d) RoP declaring that both parties had reached an agreement and subsequently signed a term sheet to settle litigation. On January 15th the present Division issued an order to stay the proceedings. On February 3rd and 4th Claimant requested withdrawal of its revocation action and requested the court render a decision declaring the proceedings closed. Claimant specifically indicated that Defendant consented to the withdrawal and that a cost decision is not requested. On February 14th the Court issued a preliminary order in which the present order has been presented to Claimant and Defendant as intended order, with the opportunity for Defendant to comment on it. Defendant chose to not lodge comments. This request is admissible since there is no final decision in the revocation action. In view of their consent, no party can be considered to have a legitimate interest in the actions being decided by the Court. The request can thus be allowed. Claimant’s request for reimbursement of 60% of the court fees (and thus an amount of EUR 12.000) can be allowed as well, as the revocation action is withdrawn before the closure of the written procedure (R. 370.9(b)(i)). In as far as necessary, the value of the action is set at 500.000 euro. ORDER The court: - allows the withdrawal of the revocation action (UPC 57037/2024); - declares the proceedings closed; - orders that this decision shall be entered on the register; - declares that there is no need for a cost decision; - orders the claimant to be reimbursed 60% of the court fees paid, and thus an amount of EUR 12.000 - sets the value of the case at EUR 500.000. Issued in Milan on 27 February 2025 NAMES AND SIGNATURES Andrea Postiglione (Presiding judge) 3 Marije Knijff (Legally qualified judge and judge-rapporteur) Pascal Weber (Technically qualified judge) For the Deputy Registrar (clerk) ORDER DETAILS Order no. ORD_7507/2025 in ACTION NUMBER: ACT_57037/2024 UPC number: UPC_CFI_604/2024 Action type: Revocation Action Related proceeding no. Application No.: 5962/2025 Application Type: Generic procedural Application
Key Holdings
- The UPC allows for the withdrawal of a case following a settlement between parties, leading to the closure of proceedings.
- When only the claimant requests withdrawal, the court will assess if the defendant has a legitimate interest in continuing the case, in line with R. 265.2 RoP.
- The court may issue a draft order for withdrawal and solicit comments from the defendant before issuing a final order.
Tags
- Case Management
- Rules of Procedure
- Settlement
- Withdrawal