UPC CFI 834/2025 – Ecovacs Robotics Co., Ltd. v Roborock (HK) Limited

Court: Local Division Düsseldorf
Date: 2025-09-04
Outcome: Application for inspection and preservation of evidence granted (ex parte order issued)
Sector: Electronics/SEP
Decision Type: Order

Expert Commentary

Full Decision Text

1 Düsseldorf Local Division UPC CFI 834/2025 Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court issued on 4 September 2025 concerning EP 3 808 512 B1 APPLICANT: Ecovacs Robotics Co., Ltd., represented by its managing director Jian Hua Zhuang, No. 518 Songwei Road, Wusongjiang Industry Park, Guoxiang Street, Wuzhong District, Suzhou, 215104 Jiangsu, China represented by: Solicitors Gerd Jaekel, Thomas Bouvet, Dr Tobias Mandler, Colin Devinant, JONES DAY, Gewürzmühlstr. 11, 80538 Munich, Germany Electronic delivery address: tmandler@jonesday.com and: Patent attorneys Andreas Holzwarth-Rochford, Dr Otto Hertzberg, JONES DAY, Germany OPPOSING PARTY: Roborock (HK) Limited, represented by CEO Richard Chang, Room 1303, 13/F., Tai Sang Bank Building, 130-132 Des Voeux Road Central, Central, Hong Kong, China Trade fair delivery address: International Radio Exhibition (IFA) from 5 September 2025 to 9 September 2025, Berlin Exhibition Centre, address: Messe Berlin GmbH, address: Messedamm 22, 14055 Berlin, Germany, there: Stand H9-127 EUROPEAN PATENT NO. EP 3 808 512 B1 PANEL/CHAMBER: Judicial panel of the Düsseldorf local division PARTICIPATING JUDGES: This order was issued by Presiding Judge Thomas, legally qualified judge Dr. Thom as rapporteur and legally qualified judge Kupecz. Dr Thom as rapporteur and legally qualified judge Kupecz.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 2 LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS: German SUBJECT: Art. 60 UPC Agreement, R. 194(d), 196, 197, 199 RoP – Application for inspection and preservation of evidence SUMMARY OF THE FACTS: On 2 September 2025, the applicant filed an application for an order for inspection and preservation of evidence at the defendants' exhibition stands in parallel with a main action. The applicant is the owner of European Patent 3 808 512 B1 (Annex JD 1; hereinafter referred to as the patent in suit), which was filed on 6 June 2019 in English as the language of the proceedings, claiming priority from the Chinese patent application (CN 201810624053) dated 15 June 2018. The grant of the patent in suit was published on 25 September 2024. The patent application is in force. The opt-out initially declared (App 49241/2024) was withdrawn by application dated 16 July 2025. The patent application is entitled "Robot localisation method, robot and storage medium". Its patent claims 1 and 9 are worded as follows: "1. A method for localising a robot (100) comprising: acquiring, by the robot (100), environment information of a current position; comparing, by the robot (100), the environment information of the current position with the environment map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; when the comparison result does not meet a set comparison requirement, determining, by the robot (100), at least one passable boundary around the current position based on the environment information of the current position; and selecting a target boundary from the at least one passable boundary, and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the passable boundary is a boundary free from obstacle blocking; moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position during a localising process; acquiring (202) environment information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during the movement; and comparing (203) the environment information with an environment map stored in the robot (100) to identify a pose of the robot (100) in the stored environment map, wherein the pose comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). "9. A robot (100), comprising: a basic machine (101), wherein the basic machine (101) is provided with one or more sensors (104), one or more processors (102), and one or more memories (103) storing computer instructions;2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 3 the one or more memories (103) are configured to store computer instructions and an environment map; the one or more processors (102) are configured to execute the computer instructions for: acquiring environment information of a current position; comparing the environment information of the current position with the environment map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; when the comparison result does not meet a set comparison requirement, determining at least one passable boundary around the current position based on the environment information of the current position of the robot (100); and selecting a target boundary from the at least one passable boundary, and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the passable boundary is a boundary free from obstacle blocking; controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position during a localising process; acquiring environment information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during the movement by the one or more sensors (104); and comparing the environment information with the environment map stored in the one or more memories (103) to identify a pose of the robot (100) in the stored environment map, wherein the pose comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). Reference is made to the further claims 2 to 8 and 10 to 17. The respondent operates worldwide. It has a branch in Hong Kong and its headquarters in Beijing. The respondent's product portfolio includes household cleaning appliances, including robot vacuum cleaners. The respondent's group of companies has other subsidiaries that operate on the European market and offer and distribute its products, including Roborock Germany GmbH (Germany), Roborock Technology Norway AS (Norway), Roborock International B.V. (Netherlands) and Roborock Poland Sp. z o.o. (Poland). The German website https://de.roborock.com/products advertises and offers the robot vacuum cleaners "Roborock Saros 10" (Annex JD 7), "Roborock S8 Max V Ultra" (Annex JD 11) and "Roborock QV 35A" (Exhibit JD 13) are advertised and offered for sale, which, in the opinion of the applicant, are identical in terms of the technology protected by the patent in suit (hereinafter: contested embodiments). The applicant purchased a copy of the "Roborock Saros 10" robot vacuum cleaner (Exhibit JD 9) and examined its behaviour and processes (Exhibit JD 10). The respondent has registered a stand at the International Radio Exhibition 2025 (hereinafter: IFA 2025) (Annexes JD 3, JD 4). The IFA 2025 trade fair will take place in Berlin from 5 September 2025 to 9 September 2025.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 4 The applicant essentially argues that it assumes that the patent in suit is highly likely to be infringed by the respondent. It bases its parallel action on the merits on observations made on the basis of the embodiments marketed by Roborock Germany GmbH. The examination of the purchased robot shows its movement sequences, the use of its sensors and scanning processes. Together with the information from the advertising material, the applicant is of the opinion that the contested embodiments make use of the features of claims 1 and 9 of the patent application. Furthermore, it can be assumed that the respondent will present the contested embodiments as part of its product portfolio at its trade fair stand, as it already did at IFA 2024. It is highly likely that the German subsidiary will obtain the contested embodiments from the respondent. The respondent does not have its own branch office, but operates from Hong Kong as far as can be seen. The trade fair appearance therefore offers the applicant the sole opportunity to determine whether the respondent is infringing the patent in question. Otherwise, large orders concluded with customers and subsequent deliveries to Europe would not be apparent or otherwise verifiable for the applicant. In the context of preserving evidence, it must be clarified whether the respondent is offering the contested embodiments at IFA 2025 and whether it is also implementing the further subclaims. It is conceivable, for example, that the respondent is using different software that leads to a different process flow for the products in dispute. The order should be issued ex parte, as the respondent will leave the trade fair with the products exhibited there after its stay. It will no longer be possible to establish patent infringement after the trade fair, and any evidence will no longer be available. Similarly, memory formatting or a short-term software update could lead to a loss of evidence. The applicant's interest in the inspection prevails because the applicant has no other means of securing evidence and there is a high probability that the respondent will make extensive offers and conclude sales transactions that would have a lasting impact on the applicant's commercial exploitation. Reference is also made to the further statements in the application and its annexes. THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATIONS: Without prior hearing of the respondent, the following inspection and evidence preservation order is issued for the purpose of securing evidence relating to the realisation of the claims of the European patent EP 3 808 512 (hereinafter referred to as the application patent), which reads as follows: Method for locating a robot (100), comprising: capturing environmental information of a current position by the robot (100); comparing the environmental information of the current position by the robot2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 5 (100) with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; if the comparison result does not satisfy a predetermined comparison requirement, determining, by the robot (100), at least one passable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position; and selecting a target boundary from the at least one passable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the passable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; Capturing (202) environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during movement, and comparing (203) the environmental information with an environmental map stored in the robot (100) to identify a pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the pose comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). (Claim 1) The method according to claim 1, wherein, prior to moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position, it further comprises: selecting a position that differs from the current position as the second position according to the environmental information of the current position (Claim 2) 3. The method according to claim 2, wherein moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position comprises: planning a navigation path to the second position by the robot (100) according to the environmental information of the current position; and moving to the second position along the navigation path to the second position; Comparing (203) the environmental information during movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to identify the pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, comprising: During the process of moving to the second position along the navigation path to the second position, comparing the environmental information at least once during the movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) in order to identify the pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 6 (Claim 3) Method according to claim 1, wherein selecting the target boundary from the at least one passable boundary comprises: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; planning a navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a relative positional relationship between the robot (100) and the at least one optimised boundary and the environment information; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to the navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary; (Claim 4) Method according to claim 1, wherein selecting the target boundary from the at least one passable boundary comprises: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a size of each optimised passable boundary and a distance between each optimised passable boundary and the current position of the robot (100). (Claim 5) Method according to claim 1, wherein determining the second position according to the target limit comprises: selecting a position from the target boundary as the second position; or selecting a position from a surrounding region outside the target boundary as the second position. (Claim 6) A method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, comprising: while the robot (100) is moving to the second position, monitoring whether a new passable boundary appears around the current position; and If the new passable boundary appears and satisfies a target boundary condition, using the new passable boundary as a new target boundary and re-determining the second position according to the new target boundary.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 7 (Claim 7) Method according to one of claims 1 to 6, comprising: while the robot (100) is moving to the second position, monitoring a current state of the target boundary; and When the target boundary disappears, selecting a new target boundary from a passable boundary around the current position and re-determining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 8) Robot (100) comprising: a base machine (101), wherein the base machine (101) is equipped with one or more sensors (104), one or more processors (102) and one or more memories (103) that store computer instructions; the one or more memories (103) are configured to store computer instructions and an environment map; The one or more processors (102) are configured to execute the computer instructions for: capturing environmental information of a current position; comparing the environmental information of the current position with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; If the comparison result does not satisfy a set comparison requirement, determining at least one traversable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position of the robot (100); and selecting a target boundary from the at least one traversable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the traversable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; acquiring environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) is moving during the movement by the one or more sensors (104); and comparing the environmental information with the environmental map stored in the one or more memories (103) to identify a position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the position comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). (Claim 9)2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 8 Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, prior to controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position, the one or more processors (102) further serve to: selecting a position that differs from the current position as the second position according to the environmental information of the current position. (Claim 10) Robot (100) according to claim 10, wherein, when the robot (100) is controlled to move to the second position, the one or more processors (102) are specifically provided for: planning a navigation path to the second position according to the environmental information of the current position of the robot (100); and controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position along the navigation path to the second position; When the pose of the robot (100) is located in the stored environmental map, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position along the navigation path to the second position, comparing the environmental information at least once during the movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) in order to identify the position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map. (Claim 11) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when selecting the target boundary, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; planning a navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a relative positional relationship between the robot (100) and the at least one optimised boundary and the environmental information; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to the navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary. (Claim 12) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when selecting the target boundary, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; and2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 9 selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a size of each optimised passable boundary and a distance between each optimised passable boundary and the current position of the robot (100). (Claim 13) robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when the second position is determined according to the target boundary, the one or more processors (102) are specifically provided for: Selecting a position from the target boundary as the second position; or Selecting a position from a surrounding region outside the target boundary as the second position. (Claim 14) A robot (100) according to any one of claims 9 to 15, wherein the one or more processors (102) are further configured to: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position, monitoring whether a new passable boundary appears around the current position of the robot (100); and if the new passable boundary appears and satisfies a target boundary condition, using the new passable boundary as a new target boundary and re-determining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 15) Robot (100) according to any one of claims 9 to 15, wherein the one or more processors (102) are further provided for: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position, monitoring an existing state of the target boundary; and When the target boundary disappears, selecting a new target boundary from a passable boundary around the current position of the robot (100) and redetermining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 16) A computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions, when the computer instructions are executed by one or more processors (102), causing the one or more processors (102) to perform the following operations:2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 10 capturing environmental information of a current position; comparing the environmental information of the current position with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; If the comparison result does not satisfy a set comparison requirement, determining at least one traversable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position; and selecting a target boundary from the at least one traversable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the traversable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; acquiring environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during the movement; and comparing the environmental information with a stored environmental map to identify a position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the position comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). I. The applicant is permitted The respondent is ordered to return vacuum robots from the product series "Roborock Saros 10", "Roborock S8", "Roborock QV 35" and any robot that collects environmental information about its current position using a navigation map and has a LiDAR system, at the IFA trade fair (hereinafter referred to as "trade fair" and "trade fair stand") taking place from 5 to 9 September 2025 in Berlin, Messeplatz 1, Messedamm 22, 14055 Berlin, by an expert and bailiff, unless the defendant makes a binding declaration that the respective robot uses the same technology as the "Roborock Saros 10", "Roborock S8" or the "Roborock QV 35" (hereinafter collectively referred to as "robots") and, in doing so, 1. to put the robots into operation, whereby the respondent is instructed to enter/provide any necessary passwords; 2. for the purpose and duration of measuring the movement sequences and processes of the robots, establishing a connection with the robots, in particular using a smartphone; 3. to make suitable settings on the robots in order to carry out measurements; 4. selecting and activating a programme on robots or using an application for them that puts the robot into operation;2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 11 5. to configure and operate programmes that activate the robots and/or read out the robots' operating data; 6. carrying out the measurement during operation of the robots and connecting measuring devices or reading devices to the robots for this purpose; 7. repeating the measurement processes until a sufficient measurement has been made with regard to the features of the patent application; 8. securing evidence at the trade fair regarding the features and process steps of the claims of the patent application by a) a detailed description of the robots and the individual process steps; b) Inspection of documents, records and/or media, including digital media and data, relating to the realisation of the features of the patent in suit by the robots or the origin, delivery or manufacture of the robots by the respondent, such as, in particular, existing assembly, installation, use, commissioning, maintenance, operation, use, servicing and repair instructions (in particular product design drawings; construction drawings; circuit diagrams; schematic diagrams; program code and wiring diagrams) or brochures, product catalogues, commercial communications, training materials, press releases, communiqués, marketing plans or equivalent advertising materials in which the robots are described, as well as correspondence, invoices, delivery notes, orders or commercial enquiries from the respondent's customers relating to the offering, placing on the market, manufacturing of the robots or possession or importation for these purposes in Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Sweden (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "documentation"); c) the production of copies, printouts, photos or videos of the robots and the documentation referred to in Section I. 8.b) at the expense of the applicant, d) the commissioning of computing and control systems, the input or removal of access security measures, e) Opening, removing or making visible covers on robots, storage cabinets, other containers and devices. f) Commissioning of computing and control systems, entering or removing access security measures. II. If an on-site inspection in accordance with Section I is not possible, the applicant shall be permitted to have the measures described in Section I.1 physically seized by a bailiff during the trade fair and then inspected by the expert as described in Section I at a location determined by the expert.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 12 III. The expert shall, within a period of 4 weeks after completion of the measures specified in Sections I. to III. and submit it to the local division, containing a detailed description of the features of the robots relevant for assessing an infringement of claims 1 to 17 of the patent application, whereby the description shall be accompanied by the evidence on which the assessment is based, such as, in particular, photographs, film recordings, documents and other data. IV. The description prepared in accordance with Section III and all other results of the inspection and preservation of evidence may only be used in main proceedings against the respondent and its affiliated companies in accordance with Sections 15 et seq. of the German Stock Corporation Act (AktG), in particular against Roborock Germany GmbH (Peter-Müller-Straße 16/16a, 40468 Düsseldorf), Roborock International B.V. (Strawinskylaan Atrium, 1077ZX, 3051, Amsterdam, Netherlands), Beijing Roborock Technology Co., Ltd. (Room 1001, 10th Floor, Building 3, Yard 17, Anju Road, Changping District, Beijing, 102206, China) and Roborock Technology Norway AS (Drammensveien 123, 0277 Oslo, Norway) and in main proceedings against purchasers of the robots. V. The following person is appointed as an expert to carry out the aforementioned measures: European Patent Attorney Stephan Keck, Witte, Weller & Partner Patentanwälte mbB, Königstr. 5 70173 Stuttgart This person may be replaced by a European patent attorney working in the same firm, in particular [...]. VI. The bailiff [...] is appointed as an assistant to the expert. As a substitute in the event of incapacity, the local bailiff responsible for the district court district of the trade fair is appointed. VII. To assist the expert, the expert may, at his own discretion, appoint a forensic IT expert to support him in his tasks. VIII. In the interests of protecting the respondent's business secrets, which may come to light during the inspection and preservation of evidence, the expert, the bailiff and the forensic IT expert are instructed to maintain confidentiality both towards the applicant personally and towards third parties. IX. During the execution of this order, in addition to the expert and the bailiff, two representatives of the applicant belonging to the following group of persons shall be permitted to be present:2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 13 − Solicitor Gerd Jaekel; − Solicitor Dr Tobias Mandler; − Solicitor Thomas Bouvet; − Colin Devinant, solicitor; − Patent attorney Dr Otto Hertzberg; − Patent Attorney Andreas Holzwarth-Rochford; − Solicitor Max Kober; − Solicitor Pascal Grandé. X. The respondent is ordered to cooperate in the implementation of the measures for inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with this order and, at the request of the bailiff and the expert, to allow 1. to allow them and the persons authorised to be present in accordance with Section IX to enter the respondent's exhibition stands at the trade fair in order to carry out the inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with this order; 2. to grant unrestricted access to the robots or parts thereof, including the entry of passwords; 3. to put the robots into operation and set them to various operating modes; 4. to instruct its managing directors, employees or other third parties working for the respondent to comply with the requests of the bailiff or the expert; 5. to allow photography or filming for documentation purposes, to take written notes and/or to use a dictaphone for his/her notes, insofar as this is relevant to the ordered inspection and preservation of evidence; 6. to allow the documentation and robots to be inspected and kept in safekeeping for the duration of the assessment, and to allow copies, photographs and/or film recordings, copies of the electronic data, or to connect data carriers brought along for this purpose and/or – at the discretion of the respondent – to connect scanning/copying devices brought along and/or to use copying devices located on site at the expense of the applicant; 7. if no photocopier is available on site or if an existing one cannot be used, to temporarily take the documents to be copied2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 14 and reproduce them in the expert's office or at another location, on condition that they return the documents as soon as they have been copied, at the latest within 72 hours; 8. to allow the tools and aids required for the aforementioned activities to be carried and used, in particular electronic devices such as laptops, one or more storage and/or recording devices or media, a dictation machine, cameras and measuring devices that can be used by the expert, his assistants and the bailiffs; 9. to disclose and make accessible to the expert the location of the robots to be assessed and the documentation; 10. to declare whether other products exhibited at the stand use the same functions and software as the robots; 11. to hand over the robots and documentation or otherwise make them available to the expert; 12. to tolerate the removal or dismantling of covers from the robots, the opening or removal of storage cabinets, other containers and devices and/or parts of devices in order to enable an inspection of all components of the robots. XI. The persons involved in carrying out the inspection and preserving evidence, in particular the bailiff, the expert and the representatives of the applicant, are obliged to keep confidential any facts that come to their knowledge in the course of executing the entire order, both vis-à-vis third parties and vis-à-vis the applicant. In addition, until the Unified Patent Court issues a release order, the aforementioned persons may not allow the applicant or third parties to inspect the robots, any seized documents and products, or the detailed description to be prepared by the expert. XII. The respondent shall be requested to comment on any confidentiality interests it may have after the expert appointed to carry out this order has submitted the detailed description to be prepared in accordance with Section III. The above-mentioned representatives of the applicant are to be heard. Only then will the court decide whether and to what extent the detailed description of the application will be brought to the applicant's personal attention and whether the duty of confidentiality for the applicant's representatives will be lifted. XIII. The applicant is obliged to bear the costs of the inspection and preservation of evidence, including the preparation of the detailed description. The applicant is required to pay the expert a reasonable advance payment, to be determined by the expert, before the inspection begins, unless the expert waives such advance payment.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 15 XIV. In the event of a culpable violation of this order, the court may impose a penalty payment on each party for each violation, the amount of which may be determined by the court taking into account the circumstances of the individual case. XV. The measures for inspection and preservation of evidence shall be revoked at the application of the respondent or shall otherwise cease to have effect if the applicant does not, within a period of no more than 31 calendar days or 20 working days, whichever is longer, after the written description of the applicant to be prepared in accordance with Section III has been disclosed or the court has issued a final decision, the applicant has brought an action against the respondent. XVI. This order shall be submitted in person by one of the representatives of the applicant named in section IX together with a copy of the application for the order, including the evidence and other documents on which the application is based prior to or upon the execution of the order, as well as the notice of provisional measures and instructions for access to the proceedings (provided by the CMS), immediately upon execution of the measures. XVII. This shall be served by the bailiff in cooperation with the applicant's legal representative present at the inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with Section IX. REASONS FOR THE ORDER: The application for an order for inspection and preservation of evidence (R. 192, 199 RoP) is successful to the extent stated. I. The Düsseldorf local division has jurisdiction pursuant to Art. 32 (1) c), 33 (1) a) and 60 UPC Agreement. The products in dispute are potentially exhibited in Germany. An imminent infringement in Germany as a contracting Member State is also sufficient to establish the local jurisdiction of the local divisions based there, including the Düsseldorf local division. The application has been filed in an admissible manner in accordance with Rule 192 of the RoP. In particular, the applicant has stated that it intends to bring an action against the respondent before the Düsseldorf local division. II. Furthermore, the applicant has credibly demonstrated that the patent in suit may be infringed by the respondent (Art. 60(1) UPC Agreement). In view of the circumstances of the case described above, it is possible that the contested embodiments will be exhibited at IFA 2025 and that they will make use of the technical teaching of the patent in suit. The applicant, who is entitled to bring the action as the owner of the patent in suit, has demonstrated in a comprehensible manner, on the basis of an expert statement (Exhibit JD 10) and various product documents (Exhibits JD 7 to 8, Exhibits JD 11 to 14), why it assumes that all features of the patent in suit are realised in the contested embodiments.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 16 III. The applicant has also demonstrated that the application is urgent (R. 194.2 a) RoP). In addition, it has provided reasons for the issuance of an ex parte order (R. 194. 2 b), c), 197 RoP). 1. The inspection or preservation of evidence is urgent. a) The applicant has clearly demonstrated that the contested embodiments may be exhibited at the IFA 2025 trade fair on the basis of the announcement of its keynote speech at the fair. Even if the announcement refers in general terms to "groundbreaking innovations, new product categories and real surprises", it is realistic to assume that the applicant will exhibit its current product portfolio, which includes the contested embodiments already offered in Europe. This may be because these are the innovations themselves, or because they are being compared with existing vacuum robots in order to highlight the difference between them and any further developed products that are not yet available. Finally, the reason put forward by the applicant, namely to attract customers by presenting as wide a range of products as possible, is also taken into account. The applicant has demonstrated in a comprehensible manner that the respondent is most likely the manufacturer from whom the German subsidiary obtains the contested embodiments, or that it will offer the contested embodiments itself at the trade fair. However, sufficient certainty for the applicant can only be provided by a binding declaration from the respondent or an examination of the contested embodiments if they are exhibited at the trade fair. According to the applicant's submission, it has no other way of proving the respondent's manufacturing and supply activities, as the respondent operates from Hong Kong. The IFA 2025 trade fair therefore currently offers the applicant an opportunity to gather evidence to prove the alleged infringement of the patent in question. b) The order was to be issued ex parte pursuant to R. 192.3, 197 RoP. Otherwise, there would be a demonstrable risk that evidence would be destroyed or would no longer be available for other reasons (R. 197.1 Alt. 2 RoP). As the applicant has clearly explained, there is a serious risk that the suction robots, which are relatively small objects, could easily be transported to another location by car and thus easily removed from access before an inspection could be carried out. Similarly, the contested embodiments could be altered by means of a short-term software update or by formatting the memory, so that there is a risk of evidence being destroyed. In such a case, it would be impossible for the applicant to prove its own acts of use or the respondent's manufacturing and/or supply activities. IV. In the context of the discretionary decision, the interests of the applicant prevail.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 17 Based on the information available to it to date, the applicant has plausibly explained why it assumes that all features of claims 1 and 9 of the patent in suit are realised in the products announced at the IFA 2025 trade fair in Berlin. It has also explained in a comprehensible manner why, due to the market presence and establishment of the respondent outside Europe, it has no other options for securing evidence of the infringement of the contested embodiments by the respondent itself. Against this background, the present order is necessary in order to satisfy the patent holder's overriding interests in this respect. The measures ordered do not place an unreasonable burden on the respondent. The confidentiality orders included in the order take sufficient account of the respondent's confidentiality interests. In order to ensure proportionality, the local division has designed the inspection order in such a way that the respondent's trade fair activities are disrupted or interrupted as little as possible. V. The applicant has paid the court fee for the application for inspection/preservation of evidence, R. 192.5 RoP. VI. Within the scope of its discretion, the local division has structured the inspection order under point II. in order to take account of the principle of proportionality. According to the application, the applicant also considers that no inspection is necessary if the respondent makes the declaration referred to in point II of the operative part. If this is not the case, the respondent has the option of handing over the vacuum robots in question to an expert so that the expert does not have to examine the vacuum robots directly at the exhibition stand, thereby interfering with the respondent's business activities. After completing the inspection, the expert shall return the products to the respondent so that it can continue its trade fair activities. This means that the expert shall have the same amount of time for the inspection as in the case of an inspection at the trade fair stand on site. This does not, of course, include returning the vacuum robots only after the end of the trade fair. If the respondent refuses to hand over the products for inspection, the applicant is entitled to have the inspection carried out by the expert and the bailiff on site at the exhibition stand. If the respondent also refuses to do so, the vacuum robots may be seized as a last resort. With regard to the security measures that the expert may take at the exhibition stand in the form of the order to section III, it was clarified that this refers to evidence that is located at the exhibition and/or is directly related to the exhibition in terms of time and location. This does not include, for example, advertisements, press releases, delivery notes, etc., which have no connection to the trade fair. Furthermore, it was also clarified that the documentation may only be copied to the extent that the expert considers necessary for the preparation of the detailed description.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 18 VII. The order provides, in accordance with R. 196.4, .5 RoP, that an expert shall be appointed to carry out the measures. In order to assist the expert in securing the evidence, the Chamber made use of the option granted by R. 196.5 sentence 2 RoP to order the assistance of a bailiff. The bailiff's involvement was particularly necessary for the alternative request for seizure in rem, which, under national law, falls within the jurisdiction of bailiffs (UPC CFI 539/2024 (LD Düsseldorf), order of 18 October 2024 – Bekaert Binjiang Steel v. Siltronic). According to R. 196.5 RoP, members or representatives of the applicant were to be excluded from the inspection and preservation of evidence. With regard to proportionality and the protection of confidential information, the number of legal representatives present during the inspection was also to be limited (Art. 60 (1) UPC Agreement, R. 196.1 RoP). The confidentiality measures ordered with regard to the legal representatives, the expert and the bailiff also take into account the respondents' interests in confidentiality, as does the procedure described above following receipt of the detailed description. Furthermore, it was necessary to order that the detailed description to be prepared by the expert may only be used in main proceedings against the respondent and the listed subsidiaries before the European Patent Court (R. 196.2 RoP). There is no legal basis for using the description for an indefinite number of customers who are also not specified in more detail. The costs of the inspection and preservation of evidence to be carried out by the expert, including the detailed description to be prepared by the expert, are to be paid by the applicant for the time being, as it is the applicant who is requesting the inspection. Unless the expert waives the payment of an advance for his costs, the applicant must pay the expert an appropriate advance, to be determined by the expert, before the inspection begins. This order, together with the documents referred to in section XVI, shall be served by the bailiff in cooperation with the applicant's legal representative present at the inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with section IX, pursuant to R. 197.2 RoP. VIII. The general threat of coercive measures included in the order gives the Chamber the necessary flexibility to respond to any violations of this order, taking into account the interests of both parties and the severity of the violation. In this specific case, it was possible to refrain from issuing an order for security to be provided. The special circumstances necessary for an ex parte order (R. 196.6 RoP) are present. Unlike in the case of an injunction, the respondent faces only minor damage at most as a result of the inspection and preservation of evidence. The present order does not prevent them from offering and distributing the products to be investigated. On this basis, and taking into account the short duration of the trade fair, ordering security would unreasonably delay the preservation of evidence and inspection, which justifies refraining from ordering security in the present case.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 19 XI. The inspection order was not to be extended to "every robot that collects environmental information about its current position using an environmental map and has a LiDAR system". This would constitute a fishing expedition. The applicant has not demonstrated in a comprehensible manner to what extent such an embodiment would likely infringe the patent in suit. Furthermore, no evidence of such products being exhibited has been provided. In particular, this cannot be inferred from the general statement about "groundbreaking innovations, new product categories and real surprises" in the announcement of the keynote speech. This deletion also means that the cooperation measure X.10. in the application (declaration as to whether other products exhibited at the trade fair stand use the same functions and the same software as the robots). Furthermore, participation measure X.7 from the application was not ordered because it is disproportionate. Instead of making copies, the expert may use his smartphone, the use of which is also permitted to him in the context of other measures. Furthermore, points II.8 d) and f) from the application were not ordered because their content is already included in the order for cooperation by the respondent under point X.2. The application for the expert to be assisted by an unnamed forensic IT expert was also not granted. On the one hand, the applicant did not explain why this assistance was necessary. The applicant did not carry out any detailed tests on the software in its own investigations and did not explain why these were necessary and had not been carried out to date. The applicant did not make the same argument with regard to the subclaims either. On the other hand, in view of the necessary confidentiality orders, the involvement of an unknown person at the discretion of the expert is too vague and disproportionate in the present case.2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 20 ORDER: I. An inspection and evidence preservation order shall be issued without prior hearing of the respondent for the purpose of securing evidence relating to the realisation of the claims of European patent EP 3 808 512. The claims asserted are as follows: "Method for localising a robot (100), comprising: capturing environmental information of a current position by the robot (100); comparing the environmental information of the current position by the robot (100) with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; if the comparison result does not meet a specified comparison requirement, determining, by the robot (100), at least one passable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position; and selecting a target boundary from the at least one passable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the passable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; capturing (202) environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during the movement; and Comparing (203) the environmental information with an environmental map stored in the robot (100) to identify a pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the pose comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). (Claim 1) The method according to claim 1, wherein, prior to moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position, it further comprises: selecting a position different from the current position as the second position according to the environment information of the current position (Claim 2) The method according to claim 2, wherein moving (201) the robot (100) from the current position to the second position comprises: planning a navigation path to the second position by the robot (100) according to the environmental information of the current position; and2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 21 moving to the second position along the navigation path to the second position; Comparing (203) the environmental information during movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to identify the pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, comprising: During the process of moving to the second position along the navigation path to the second position, comparing at least once the environmental information during the movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) in order to identify the pose of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map. (Claim 3) Method according to claim 1, wherein selecting the target boundary from the at least one passable boundary comprises: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; planning a navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a relative positional relationship between the robot (100) and the at least one optimised boundary and the environmental information; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to the navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary; (Claim 4) Method according to claim 1, wherein selecting the target boundary from the at least one passable boundary comprises: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a size of each optimised passable boundary and a distance between each optimised passable boundary and the current position of the robot (100). (Claim 5) The method according to claim 1, wherein determining the second position according to the target boundary comprises:2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 22 selecting a position from the target boundary as the second position; or selecting a position from a surrounding region outside the target boundary as the second position. (Claim 6) A method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, comprising: While the robot (100) is moving to the second position, monitor whether a new passable boundary appears around the current position; and If the new passable boundary appears and satisfies a target boundary condition, use the new passable boundary as a new target boundary and redetermine the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 7) A method according to any one of claims 1 to 6, comprising: During movement of the robot (100) to the second position, monitoring an existing state of the target boundary; and When the target boundary disappears, selecting a new target boundary from a passable boundary around the current position and re-determining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 8) A robot (100) comprising: a base machine (101), wherein the base machine (101) is equipped with one or more sensors (104), one or more processors (102), and one or more memories (103) that store computer instructions; The one or more memories (103) are configured to store computer instructions and an environment map; The one or more processors (102) are configured to execute the computer instructions for: capturing environmental information of a current position; comparing the environmental information of the current position with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result;2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 23 if the comparison result does not meet a set comparison requirement, determining at least one traversable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position of the robot (100); and selecting a target boundary from the at least one traversable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the traversable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; Controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; capturing environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) is moving during the movement by the one or more sensors (104); and comparing the environmental information with the environmental map stored in the one or more memories (103) to identify a position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the position comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). (Claim 9) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, prior to controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position, the one or more processors (102) further serve to: selecting a position that differs from the current position as the second position according to the environmental information of the current position. (Claim 10) Robot (100) according to claim 10, wherein, when the robot (100) is controlled to move to the second position, the one or more processors (102) are specifically provided for: planning a navigation path to the second position according to the environmental information of the current position of the robot (100); and controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position along the navigation path to the second position; When the pose of the robot (100) is located in the stored environmental map, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position along the navigation path to the second position,2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 24 at least once comparing the environmental information during movement with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) in order to identify the position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map. (Claim 11) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when selecting the target boundary, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; planning a navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a relative positional relationship between the robot (100) and the at least one optimised boundary and the environmental information; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to the navigation path to the at least one optimised passable boundary. (Claim 12) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when selecting the target boundary, the one or more processors (102) are specifically configured to: optimising the at least one passable boundary to obtain at least one optimised passable boundary; and selecting the target boundary from the at least one optimised passable boundary according to a size of each optimised passable boundary and a distance between each optimised passable boundary and the current position of the robot (100). (Claim 13) Robot (100) according to claim 9, wherein, when the second position is determined according to the target limit, the one or more processors (102) are specifically provided for: selecting a position from the target boundary as the second position; or selecting a position from a surrounding region outside the target boundary as the second position. (Claim 14) A robot (100) according to any one of claims 9 to 15, wherein the one or more2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 25 processors (102) are further configured to: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position, monitoring whether a new passable boundary appears around the current position of the robot (100); and if the new passable boundary appears and satisfies a target boundary condition, using the new passable boundary as a new target boundary and redetermining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 15) A robot (100) according to any one of claims 9 to 15, wherein the one or more processors (102) are further provided for: During the process of controlling the robot (100) to move to the second position, monitoring an existing state of the target boundary; and If the target boundary disappears, selecting a new target boundary from a passable boundary around the current position of the robot (100) and re- determining the second position according to the new target boundary. (Claim 16) A computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions, when the computer instructions are executed by one or more processors (102), causing the one or more processors (102) to perform the following operations: Capturing environmental information of a current position; Comparing the environmental information of the current position with the environmental map stored in the robot (100) to obtain a comparison result; If the comparison result does not meet a set comparison requirement, determining at least one traversable boundary around the current position based on the environmental information of the current position; and Selecting a target boundary from the at least one traversable boundary and determining a second position according to the target boundary; wherein the traversable boundary is a boundary that is free of obstacle blocking; controlling the robot (100) to move from the current position to the second position during a localisation process; acquiring environmental information of an environment in which the robot (100) moves during the movement; and2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 26 Comparing the environmental information with a stored environmental map to identify a position of the robot (100) in the stored environmental map, wherein the position comprises a position and orientation of the robot (100). II. Unless the respondent makes a binding declaration that the vacuum robots of the product series "Roborock Saros 10", "Roborock S8" and "Roborock QV 35", which are located at the IFA trade fair (hereinafter referred to as "trade fair" and "trade fair stand") taking place from 5 to 9 September 2025 in Berlin, Messeplatz 1, Messedamm 22, 14055 Berlin, will use the same technology as the embodiments distributed by Roborock Germany with regard to the features of the patent application listed in Section I, the respondent is ordered to 1. Robot vacuum cleaners from the product series "Roborock Saros 10", "Roborock S8", "Roborock QV 35" (hereinafter: robots), which are located at the IFA trade fair (hereinafter "trade fair" and "exhibition stand") to an expert and to hand them over for inspection at a location other than the exhibition stand to be determined by the expert, whereby the expert must return the robots to the respondent after completion of the inspection and whereby the expert is permitted to a. operate the robots, whereby the respondent is instructed to enter/provide any necessary passwords; b. for the purpose and for the duration of the measurements of the movement sequences and processes of the robots, to establish a connection with the robots, in particular by means of a smartphone; c. to make appropriate settings on the robots in order to carry out measurements; d. selecting and activating a programme on robots or using an application for them that puts the robot into operation; e. configure and operate programmes that start up robots and/or read out the robot's operating data; f. to carry out measurements during robot operation and to connect measuring devices or readers to the robots for this purpose; g. repeating the measurement processes until a sufficient measurement has been made with regard to the features of the patent application; alternatively, in the event of a refusal by the respondent,2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 27 2. the applicant is permitted to inspect suction robots from the "Roborock Saros 10", "Roborock S8" and "Roborock QV 35" product series (hereinafter: robots) at the IFA trade fair (hereinafter: "trade fair" and "trade fair stand") taking place from 5 to 9 September 2025 in Berlin, Messeplatz 1, Messedamm 22, 14055 Berlin (hereinafter referred to as "trade fair" and "trade fair stand"), at the respondent's trade fair stand by an expert and a bailiff, and in doing so a. to put the robots into operation, whereby the respondent is instructed to enter any necessary passwords; b. for the purpose and duration of measuring the movement sequences and processes of the robots, to establish a connection with the robots, in particular by means of a smartphone; c. to make appropriate settings on the robots in order to carry out measurements; d. selecting and activating a programme on robots or using an application for them that puts the robot into operation; e. configure and operate programmes that start up robots and/or read out the robot's operating data; f. to carry out measurements during robot operation and to connect measuring devices or readers to the robots for this purpose; g. repeating the measurement processes until a sufficient measurement has been made with regard to the features of the patent application; alternatively, if an inspection in accordance with Section II.2 is not possible on site, 3. the applicant shall be permitted to have the robots physically seized by a bailiff during the trade fair and then have the measures described in Sections II. 1./2. inspected by the expert at a location determined by the expert. III. The applicant shall be permitted to have an expert secure evidence – regarding the realisation of the features and regarding the procedural steps of the claims of the patent application (see Section I) – which is located at the trade fair and/or is directly related to the trade fair appearance in terms of time and location, by means of 1. a detailed description of the robots and the individual process steps; 2. access to documents, records and/or media, including digital media and data, relating to the implementation of the features of the patent in suit by the robots or the origin, delivery or manufacture of the robots by the respondent, such as, in particular, existing construction, installation, use, commissioning, maintenance, operation, utilisation, servicing and repair documentation2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 28 of the robots by the respondent, such as, in particular, existing assembly, installation, use, commissioning, maintenance, operation, user, servicing and repair instructions (in particular product design drawings; construction drawings; circuit diagrams; schematic diagrams; program code and wiring diagrams) or brochures, product catalogues, commercial communications, training materials, press releases, communiqués, marketing plans or equivalent advertising materials in which the robots are described, as well as correspondence, invoices, delivery notes, orders or commercial enquiries from customers of the respondent relating to the offering, marketing, manufacture of the robots or possession or importation for these purposes in Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Luxembourg and Sweden (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "documentation"); 3. the production of copies, printouts, photos or videos of the robots and the documentation referred to in Section III. 2) at the expense of the applicant, to the extent necessary for the preparation of the detailed description; 4. Opening, removing or making visible the covers of robots, storage cabinets, other containers and devices. IV. The expert shall, within a period of four weeks after completion of the measures referred to in points I. to III., and submit it to the local division, containing a detailed description of the features of the robots relevant for assessing an infringement of claims 1 to 17 of the patent application, whereby the description shall be accompanied by the evidence on which the assessment is based, such as, in particular, photographs, film recordings, documents and other data as attachments. V. The description prepared in accordance with section IV and all other results of the inspection and preservation of evidence may only be used in main proceedings before the European Patent Court (UPC) against the respondent and its affiliated companies in accordance with Sections 15 et seq. of the German Stock Corporation Act, in particular against Roborock Germany GmbH (Peter-Müller-Straße 16/16a, 40468 Düsseldorf), Roborock International B.V. (Strawinskylaan Atrium, 1077ZX, 3051, Amsterdam, Netherlands), Beijing Roborock Technology Co., Ltd. (Room 1001, 10th Floor, Building 3, Yard 17, Anju Road, Changping District, Beijing, 102206, China) and Roborock Technology Norway AS (Drammensveien 123, 0277 Oslo, Norway). VI. The following person is appointed as the expert to carry out the aforementioned measures: European Patent Attorney Stephan Keck, Witte, Weller & Partner Patentanwälte mbB, Königstr. 5, 70173 Stuttgart This person may be replaced by a European patent attorney working in the same firm, in particular [...].2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 29 VII. The bailiff [...] is appointed as an assistant to the expert. As a substitute in the event of incapacity, the local bailiff responsible for the district court district of the trade fair is appointed. VIII. In the interests of protecting the respondent's business secrets, which may come to light during the inspection and preservation of evidence, the expert and the bailiff are instructed to maintain confidentiality both towards the applicant personally and towards third parties. IX. During the execution of this order, in addition to the expert and the bailiff, two representatives of the applicant belonging to the following group of persons are permitted to be present: − Solicitor Gerd Jaekel; − Solicitor Dr Tobias Mandler; − Solicitor Thomas Bouvet; − Colin Devinant, solicitor; − Patent attorney Dr Otto Hertzberg; − Patent attorney Andreas Holzwarth-Rochford; − Solicitor Max Kober; − Solicitor Pascal Grandé. X. The respondent is ordered to cooperate in the implementation of the measures for inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with this order and, at the request of the bailiff and the expert, to allow 1. to allow them and the persons authorised to be present in accordance with Section IX to enter the respondent's exhibition stands at the trade fair in order to carry out the inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with this order; 2. to grant unrestricted access to the robots or parts thereof, including the entry of passwords; 3. to put the robots into operation and into various operating states; 4. to instruct its managing directors, employees or other third parties working for the respondent to comply with the requests of the bailiff or the expert;2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 30 5. to allow photography or filming for documentation purposes, to take written notes and/or to use a dictaphone for his/her notes, insofar as this is relevant to the ordered inspection and preservation of evidence; 6. to allow the documentation and robots to be inspected and kept in safekeeping for the duration of the assessment, and to allow copies, photographs and/or film recordings, copies of the electronic data may be made, or data carriers brought along for this purpose may be connected and/or – at the discretion of the respondent – scanning/copying devices brought along may be connected and/or copying devices located on site may be used at the expense of the applicant; 7. to permit the aforementioned activities, tools and aids to be carried and used, in particular electronic devices such as laptops, one or more storage and/or recording devices or media, a dictation device, cameras and measuring devices that may be used by the expert, his assistants and the bailiffs; 8. to disclose and make accessible to the expert the location of the robots to be examined and the documentation; 9. to hand over the robots and documentation on site or otherwise make them available to the expert; 10. to tolerate the removal or dismantling of covers from the robots, the opening or removal of storage cabinets, other containers and devices and/or parts of devices in order to enable an assessment of all components of the robots. XI. The persons involved in carrying out the inspection and securing evidence, in particular the bailiff, the expert and the representatives of the application, are obliged to keep confidential any facts that come to their knowledge in the course of executing the entire order, both vis-à-vis third parties and vis-à-vis the application. In addition, the aforementioned persons may not, until a release order has been issued by the Unified Patent Court, give the applicant or third parties any opportunity to inspect the robots, any seized documents and products, or the detailed description to be prepared by the expert. XII. The respondent shall be requested to comment on any confidentiality interests it may have after the expert appointed to carry out this order has submitted the detailed description to be prepared in accordance with section IV. The above-mentioned representatives of the applicant shall be heard. Only then shall the court decide whether and to what extent the detailed description of the application shall be brought to the personal attention of the applicant and whether the duty of confidentiality shall be lifted for the representatives of the applicant. XIII. The applicant is obliged to bear the costs of the inspection and preservation of evidence, including the preparation of the detailed description. The applicant2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 31 is required to pay the expert a reasonable advance on costs, to be determined by the expert, before the inspection begins, unless the expert waives such an advance payment. XIV. In the event of a culpable violation of this order, the court may impose a penalty payment on each party for each violation, the amount of which may be determined by the court taking into account the circumstances of the individual case. XV. The measures for inspection and preservation of evidence shall be revoked at the application of the respondent or shall otherwise cease to have effect if the applicant does not, within a period of no more than 31 calendar days or 20 working days, whichever is longer, after the written description of the applicant to be prepared in accordance with Section IV has been disclosed or the court has decided by a final decision not to grant access to this description, has brought the main proceedings in the matter against the respondent before the Unified Patent Court. XVI. This order shall be submitted in person by one of the representatives of the applicant named in section IX together with a copy of the application for this order, including the evidence and other documents on which the application is based prior to or upon execution of this order, as well as the notice of provisional measures and instructions for access to the proceedings (provided by the CMS). XVII. This order shall be served by the bailiff in cooperation with the applicant's legal representative present at the inspection and preservation of evidence in accordance with Section IX. XVIII. In all other respects, the application for inspection and preservation of evidence is rejected. INFORMATION ON REVIEW AND APPEAL: The respondents may request a review of this order within 30 days of the measures being enforced (Art. 60 (6) UPC Agreement, R. 197.3 RoP). The party adversely affected may appeal against this order within 15 days of its service (Art. 73(2)(a) UPC Agreement, R. 220.1(c) RoP).2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com 32 DETAILS OF THE ORDER: Main file number: ACT 35974/2025 UPC number: UPC CFI 834/2025 Type of proceedings: Application for preservation of evidence and inspection Issued on 4 September 2025 NAMES AND SIGNATURES Presiding Judge Thomas Legally qualified judge Dr. Thom Legally qualified judge Kupecz for the Deputy-Registrar2025-09-04 LD Dusseldorf UPC CFI 834-2025 ACT 35974-2025 ORD 36223-2025 en-GB.pdfDeepL machine translation provided by www.veron.com

Key Holdings

The Düsseldorf Local Division has jurisdiction over the application for inspection and preservation of evidence concerning potential patent infringement in Germany.
The applicant credibly demonstrated a high likelihood of infringement of European Patent EP 3 808 512 B1 by the respondent's 'Roborock Saros 10', 'Roborock S8', and 'Roborock QV 35' robot vacuum cleaners.
An ex parte order for inspection and preservation of evidence was granted due to the urgency of securing evidence at the IFA 2025 trade fair and the demonstrable risk of evidence destruction or removal.
The order mandates specific inspection measures, including operating the robots, accessing documentation, and making copies, while imposing strict confidentiality obligations on all involved parties to protect the respondent's business secrets.
The scope of the inspection is limited to specific product series and evidence directly related to the trade fair, rejecting broader requests deemed a 'fishing expedition' or disproportionate.

UPC CFI 834/2025 – Ecovacs Robotics Co., Ltd. v Roborock (HK) Limited

Expert Commentary

Full Decision Text

Key Holdings

Tags

Related Cases