UPC_CoA_826/2024 – Suinno v Microsoft
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Date
- Outcome
- Granted
- Sector
- Other
- Decision Type
- PROCEDURAL
Expert Commentary
Protection confidential information Background Microsoft filed for discretionary review on 19 December 2024 (see above) and included an exhibit for which it applied for protection of confidentiality (R. 262A RoP/R. 262.2 RoP). Decision The document – a license offer from Suinno to Microsoft – is known to Suinno, so a decision on R. 262A RoP is not necessary, but R. 262.2 RoP is justified (it should not be “accessible to the public”). Comment The standing judge simply rules “Confidentiality is granted”. That seems to mean that Suinno cannot make the content public (which is probably already under such obligation based on an NDA), that the public will not have or get access, and that the Court will not mention the document’s contents in a decision.
Full Decision Text
1 Reference no.: UPC_CoA_826/2024 APL_67135/2024 App_67329/2024 Order of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued on 23 December 2024 concerning an application for protection of confidential information (Rule 262 RoP) APPLICANT AND DEFENDANT IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, 98052-6399 Redmond, USA (hereinafter "Microsoft"), represented by Prof. Tilmann Müller-Stoy, attorney at law, Bardehle Pagenberg, Partnerschaft mbB Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte RESPONDENT AND CLAIMANT IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE Suinno Mobile & AI Technologies Licensing Oy, PO Box 346, 00131 Helsinki, Finland (hereinafter "Suinno"), represented by Mikko Kalervo Väänänen, Suinno Oy PATENT IN SUIT EP 2 671 173 DECIDING JUDGE Emmanuel Gougé, Legally qualified judge and Standing judge LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS English IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE □ Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court, Central division Paris, dated 26 November 2024 □ Reference numbers: App_55394/2024 ORD_62379/2024 ACT_18406/2024 UPC_CFI_164/2024 SUMMARY OF THE FACTS AND APPLICATION In its application filed on 19 December 2024, Microsoft has requested that Exhibit BP 01, which was filed together with its R 220.3 application for discretionary review and which contains confidential information, shall be treated as confidential and not be used or disclosed outside of the present legal 2 dispute. It has filed its application by reference to the provisions of R 262A RoP (“protection of confidential information”) and provided both a confidential and unredacted version and a non-confidential redacted version of said Exhibit BP 01. REASONS The application for confidentiality must be granted. R 262A RoP refers to the protection of confidential information between parties involved in a particular dispute, while R 262 RoP refers to the public access to the register and the protection of confidential information towards the public. R 262.2 RoP provides that a party may request that certain information of written pleadings or evidence be kept confidential and provide specific reasons for such confidentiality. Microsoft has requested that certain information be kept confidential and not accessible to the public and has given specific reasons thereto. Exhibit BP 01, for which confidentiality of some information is requested, is a document dated 03 December 2024 entitled “Confidential Global Licence & Art 79 UPCA Settlement offer to Microsoft” signed by Suinno’s representative. This document, in its original version, is obviously known by Suinno and its representative and, as a result, does not require a restriction of access to specific persons pursuant to R 262A RoP. Instead, considering the confidential nature of some information contained therein, its original confidential version shall be treated as confidential and shall not be available to the public. PROCEDURAL ORDER The application for confidentiality of Exhibit BP 01 is granted. This order was issued on 23 December 2024. Emmanuel Gougé Legally qualified judge and Standing judge
Key Holdings
- A request for confidentiality under R. 262.2 RoP was granted for a license offer, preventing public access to the document.
- A decision under R. 262A RoP was deemed unnecessary because the document in question was already known to the party seeking its protection.
- The confidentiality order implies that the content cannot be made public by the parties and will not be mentioned in the Court's decision.
Tags
- Confidentiality
- Evidence
- Rules of Procedure