- within Intellectual Property topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Healthcare, Oil & Gas and Law Firm industries
- within Transport topic(s)
1. Key takeaways
Rehearing is an exceptional remedy; only fundamental, outcome‑determinative procedural defects justify reopening final appeal decisions (Art. 81(1) UPCA; R. 245, 247 RoP)
The court reaffirms the rulings in UPC_CoA_405/2024, decision of 19 June 2025, Alexion vs Amgen, and UPC_CoA_402/2024, decision of 19 June 2025, Alexion vs Samsung. Especially, it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate that, without the defect, the same decision would not have been made. In this case, the claimant's allegations primarily reiterated previous arguments or expressed disagreement with the court's assessment; neither constitutes a fundamental defect nor impacts the outcome.
Admissibility of an application for rehearing requires prior objection; Procedural defects must have been raised and dismissed during earlier proceedings unless impossible (R. 248.1 RoP)
The claimant's objections were previously brought forward to and assessed in the order under review.
Non‑compliance with security‑for‑costs orders generally warrants a default decision; exceptions are truly exceptional (R. 158.5 RoP; R. 355.1(a) RoP; Art. 37 UPCA)
2. Division
Court of Appeal (Luxembourg)
3. UPC number
UPC_CoA_883/2025; UPC_CoA_892/2025
4. Type of proceedings
Applications for rehearing (Art. 81(1) UPCA; R. 245, 247, 248 RoP) and request for suspensive effect (R. 252 RoP)
5. Parties
Applicant/Appellant (Defendant in the Rule 158 application;
Claimant in the main infringement action): Suinno Mobile & AI
Technologies Licensing Oy
Respondent (Applicant in the Rule 158 application; Defendant in the
main infringement action): Microsoft Corporation
6. Patent(s)
EP 2 671 173
7.Jurisdictions
UPC
8. Body of legislation / Rules
R. 245 RoP (Application for rehearing)
R. 247 RoP (Grounds for rehearing)
R. 248 RoP (Admissibility; objection requirement)
R. 350 RoP (Content of decisions)
R. 158.4–.5 RoP (Security for costs; consequence of
non‑compliance)
R. 355.1(a) RoP (Decision by default)
R. 252 RoP (No suspensive effect unless ordered)
Art. 81 UPCA (Rehearing; finality of decisions)
Art. 76(2)–(3) UPCA (Right to be heard; free evaluation of
evidence)
Art. 37 UPCA (Decision by default)
Art. 6 ECHR (Fair trial)
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
