Dear Reader,

In recent months there has been criticism about the concentration of cases at the UPC's German local divisions. Now the Administrative Committee has discussed the matter and decided there will be no proactive redistribution of cases. Such a move would require amending the UPC Agreement and would undermine the plaintiff’s right to choose. Instead, the court is opting for softer levers: seconding experienced judges to quieter divisions more frequently, giving international judges a stronger role as judge-rapporteurs, and encouraging preliminary opinions across all divisions. The latter is a quiet nod to the very German practice that many patent holders find so attractive in Munich, Düsseldorf and Mannheim.

Meanwhile, the case law continues to accumulate at pace. The UPC Court of Appeal has handed FujiFilm a notable turnaround against Kodak, reinstating an injunction after the EPO agreed to limit the patent-in-suit following its revocation in Mannheim – a reminder that a first-instance defeat at the UPC is far from the end of the road. In Hamburg, the local division imposed penalty payments on silent defendant Ningbo Blue Pluser for continuing to advertise infringing filter cartridges online, showing that ignoring a UPC injunction can be an expensive strategy.

National courts also turned out some notable decisions.  At the District Court The Hague, Halozyme learned in the Keytruda dispute that a procedural statement in written pleadings is not the same as an enforceable undertaking. Add to that KaVo's win at Munich Regional Court with the latter ordering MK-Dent to pay damages for eleven years of dental turbine infringement and one thing is unmistakable: even in mid-summer, Europe's patent courts are anything but on holiday.