UPC refuses preliminary injunction over earlier opt-out

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

UPC refuses preliminary injunction over earlier opt-out

Helsinki, Finland
Helsinki

The Helsinki local division rejected AIM Sport’s request for a preliminary injunction in a dispute with rival Supponor

The Unified Patent Court’s Helsinki division rejected a preliminary injunction request from sports advertising specialist AIM in its lawsuit against rival Supponor yesterday, September 21.

A panel made up of Presiding Judge Petri Rinkinen, and Judges Samuel Granata, Mélanie Bessaud, and Eric Augarde handed down the decision after a one-day hearing.

AIM’s PI request failed because it initially opted the asserted patent out of the UPC system before the court opened on June 1.

The sports advertising company later tried to withdraw the opt-out, but the Helsinki court ruled yesterday that it couldn’t because of parallel national proceedings in England and Germany.

Lawyers from Roschier, Powell Gilbert, Rospatt Osten Pross, and Noerr represented AIM in the UPC proceedings, while Hogan Lovells acted for Supponor.

AIM filed the UPC suit in July, as part of a wider dispute in which German and English courts have found Supponor to have infringed valid AIM patents.

Appeals stemming from those decisions are pending.

Yesterday marked the latest in a string of decisions from the new court, which started hearing cases in June.

Earlier this week, the Munich local division granted the first PI to follow a full oral hearing between the parties, in favour of 10x Genomics against NanoString.

On Wednesday, September 13 the Vienna local division refused a PI in a suit between coffeemaker rivals Cup&Cino and Alpina.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article