UPC_ CFI_716/2025 – ETRI v Hisense
- Court
- Local Division Düsseldorf
- Date
- Outcome
- Settled
- Sector
- Electronics/SEP
- Decision Type
- SETTLEMENT
Expert Commentary
Settlement Facts Parties settled (via an application to withdraw per R. 265 RoP consented by the defendant) before the end of the written procedure and do not want a cost decision. The Court Grants the application and orders 60% return of court fees to the claimant. Comment The UPC proceedings - with its consequences for numerous countries - often triggers a settlement (happening in a relatively high number of cases). However, as said before, the UPC has performed its important settlement function in this case, so I cannot see why the UPC (that should finance itself) should reimburse (part of) the court fees. If you do not want to pay the fees then settle without using the UPC (but that often proves difficult!).
Full Decision Text
1 Düsseldorf Local Division UPC CFI 716/2025 Decision of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court issued on 16 February 2026 concerning EP 2 258 692 B1 CLAIMANT: Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI), represented by its president Mr Bang Seung Chan, 218 Gajeong-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34129, Korea Litigation Counsel: Attorney-at-law Dr Tilmann Müller, Attorney-at-law Dr Volkmar Henke, Attorneys-at-law and UPC Representatives of Bardehle Pagenberg Partnership mbB, Patent attorneys, attorneys-at-law, Bohnenstraße 4, 20457 Hamburg, Germany Patent attorneys: Patent attorney Georg Anetsberger, Patent attorneys and UPC Representatives of Bardehle Pagenberg Partnership mbB Patent attorneys, attorneys at law, Prinzregentenplatz 7, 81675 Munich, Germany Electronic address for service: mueller@bardehle.de DEFENDANTS: 1. Hisense Gorenje Germany GmbH, represented by its directors, Parkring 31-33, 85748 Garching, Germany 2. ATAG Nederland B.V., represented by its directors, Impact 83, 6921 RZ Duiven, The Netherlands 3. Gorenje gospodinjski aparati, d.o.o, represented by its directors, Partizanska cesta 12, 3320 Velenje, Slovenia 4. Hisense Visual Technology Co, Ltd, represented by its directors, No. 218, Qianwangang road, Economy Development Zone, 266555 Qingdao, People's Republic of China 5. Hisense France SAS, represented by its directors, 12-16 Rue Sarah Bernhardt, 92600 Asnières-Sur-Seine, France 6. Hisense Italia S.r.l., represented by its directors, Via Montefeltro, 6A, 20156 Milan, Italy Litigation Counsel: Attorney-at-law Dr Stephan Dorn, Attorney-at-law Sebastian Vautz, CMS Hasche Sigle Partnerschaft von 2 Rechtsanwälten und Steuerberatern mbB, Kasernenstr. 43- 45, 40213 Düsseldorf Electronic address for service: sebastian.vautz@cms-hs.com PATENT IN SUIT: EUROPEAN PATENT NO. EP 3 258 692 B1 PANEL/DIVISION: Panel of the Düsseldorf Local Division DECIDING JUDGES: This Decision was made by Presiding Judge Thomas, legally qualified Judge Dr Thom acting as judge-rapporteur and legally qualified Judge Johansson. LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: English SUBJECT: R. 265 RoP – Withdrawl FACTS AND GROUNDS: Due to a settlement Claimant submitted an application to withdraw the infringement action against all Defendants, to confirm that Claimant must pay the court fees and that each party bears its own costs (no requests for cost compensation), and to order, that 60 % of the Court fees be reimbursed to Claimant. Defendants have given their consent to the motion to withdraw the action as well as to the Claim- ant’s motion regarding the costs. The decision follows the parties’ jointly expressed will. No cost decision is required in this case due to the parties’ declarations. The order to reimburse the Claimant 60 % of the court fees is based on R.370.11 and R.370.9(b)(i) RoP, the action has been settled before the closure of the written procedure. ORDER: The Court I. permits the withdrawal of the action and declares the proceedings closed; II. orders that this decision be entered in the Register; III. declares that there is no need for a cost decision since all parties, who incurred costs, agree to bear their own costs; IV. sets the value in dispute for the action at € 2,500,000; V. orders that 60% of the Court fees (= € 14,400) be reimbursed to Claimant. 3 Issued in Düsseldorf on 16 February 2026 NAME UND SIGNATURE Presiding judge Thomas Legally qualified judge Dr Thom Legally qualified judge Johansson For the sub-registrar Ronny Thomas Digital unterschrieben von Ronny Thomas Datum: 2026.02.11 15:36:31 +01'00' Anna Bérénice Dr. THOM Digital unterschrieben von Anna Bérénice Dr. THOM Datum: 2026.02.11 15:43:34 +01'00'
Key Holdings
- A settlement reached before the end of the written procedure, with a withdrawal application under R. 265 RoP consented by the defendant, is granted.
- A 60% return of court fees to the claimant can be ordered in such settlement cases.
- UPC proceedings frequently lead to settlements.
Tags
- Settlement
- Withdrawal
- Court Fees
- Procedure