United States: A View From Across The Pond

If it works as advertised, Europe's new Unified Patent Court (UPC), set to begin hearing patent enforcement disputes in 2017, will indisputably impact strategies for managing global patent portfolios and litigations. To a U.S. lawyer, the concept of replacing, or more accurately supplementing, the European Union's (EU) many patent systems, having various procedural and substantive laws, is appealing. This prospect of a unified court having exclusive jurisdiction to hear infringement and revocation (validity) actions for both traditional "bundle" European patents and the new "unitary patents" is a game changer. We recently went through a significant change in our enforcement system in the U.S. with the implementation of post-grant proceedings and the creation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The effect has been more far reaching than most imagined. Europe is setting the stage for an even more significant transformation by creating an enforcement action which combined would have a similar market size and larger population than the U.S. One action at the UPC will soon have the ability to achieve enforcement outcomes on a similar scale to US actions, potentially at a lower cost and faster time to disposition.

The UPC's decentralised Court of First Instance (CFI) with local, regional, and central divisions, and a centralised Court of Appeal in some regards parallels the US patent enforcement structure comprising US district courts and the PTAB feeding into the Federal Circuit for appeals, but a closer look shows it diverges in many key aspects.1 And at least on paper, many of these provide potential advantages compared with the U.S. system.


The key to the success of the newly formed PTAB at the USPTO has been largely due to the Judges. The CFI will comprise three legally-qualified judges and a fourth technically qualified judge if deemed necessary. Five judges will comprise the Court of Appeal panel—three legally qualified judges and two technically qualified judges. Technically qualified judges will be trained in legal matters and each panel will have an international composition. Thus, while there has been much talk of the quality of judges at the UPC, in theory the UPC system provides potential for high-quality decisions from qualified patent judges compared with the U.S. district court system, which can be largely decided by a jury or best case a judge with little or no technical background or patent specialisation. Thus, on paper, the judges at the UPC are more comparable with the three-judge panels at the PTAB and Federal Circuit.

Forum Selection

The CFI's central division will have seats in Paris, London, and Munich, with each seat handling specific technologies, and states may form local or regional divisions. Parties can file infringement and non-infringement declaration actions in local/regional divisions where infringement occurs or where defendants' reside or do business, or in the central division absent an appropriate local/regional division or by agreement of the parties. Revocation actions are fi led with the central division, but local/regional divisions may handle or bifurcate revocation counterclaims to the central division. If a claimant files a non-infringement action first (central) and the patentee files an infringement action second (local/regional) within three months, the central division must stay its action. Outside three months, the central and local/regional division panels consult and agree on future progress, including potentially staying one action.

This system parallels venue selection for infringement actions in U.S. district courts in that it will afford some opportunity to forum select, but differs in that the defendant need not have an established place of business in the local/ regional division if infringement occurs there. It also differs by giving the patentee three months to switch venue from the central to a local/regional venue of its choice for declaratory non-infringement actions.

The handling of revocation actions by either the central versus the local/regional divisions echo to some extent forum selection in the U.S. with respect to pursuing validity claims at the PTAB versus a district court. Similar to inter partes review (IPR) attacks at the PTAB in the US but broader in scope, the "unitary patent" will be vulnerable to central attack at the UPC in Europe at any time after grant.

Theoretically, all divisions of the CFI will be relying on the same well-established EPC law and any venue concerns may largely be addressed by having a single common Court of Appeal. It remains to be seen, however, whether the predictability of CFI decisions and how variances across different divisions will affect forum selection strategies in both Europe and the U.S., as a favorable decision in Europe could be used to leverage a favorable outcome in the U.S. and vise versa.


At first glance the UPC procedures are strikingly similar to the post-grant proceedings at the PTAB with the significant addition of, in many cases, also handling infringement. UPC proceedings will involve three stages or "procedures"—a written stage, an interim stage, and oral stage. During the written stage, parties exchange four rounds of written pleadings—claim, defence, reply, and rejoinder—with copies of any documents, including witness statements, referenced. Claim construction is rolled into infringement, revocation, and amendment exchanges as necessary. If validity is challenged, the patentee can apply to amend the specification and the claims, may provide one or more alternative claim sets "where applicable and appropriate" either unconditionally or if conditionally, reasonable in number.

Following the close of written procedure and decision on bifurcation, the "judge-rapporteur" prepares the case for oral hearing (trial) during the interim stage, which may include an interim conference. This stage allows the judge-rapporteur to issue orders regarding producing further pleadings, documents, experts (including court experts), experiments, inspections, further written evidence, and to determine the subject-matter and scope of the oral hearing.

The oral stage starts immediately after the judge-rapporteur closes the interim stage, with the presiding judge taking over case management. The parties provide their oral submissions during an envisioned one-day oral hearing, and, if ordered during the interim, the court may hold a separate hearing for witnesses and experts. In exceptional cases, the court may adjourn and call for further evidence.

Thus, the UPC system more closely resembles post-grant proceedings before the PTAB than patent litigation before U.S. district courts. Like PTAB proceedings, the bulk of the procedure consists of written exchanges culminating in a short oral hearing and claims may be amended. Compared with U.S. district court litigation, opportunities to cross-examine fact witnesses and experts appears limited. Like PTAB trials, where live testimony before judges is rare, the UPC system may not afford the panel much opportunity to assess the demeanor and credibility of witnesses. From a U.S. perspective, the differences in live testimony could impact global strategies for bringing patent enforcement actions in the U.S. and Europe.

Time to Trial

The UPC contemplates conducting the written stage in six months for infringement actions, seven months for revocation actions, and nine months for infringement proceedings with revocation counterclaims. With the judge-rapporteur instructed to complete the interim stage in three months (9-12 months from filing), and the court instructed to issue its final judgment within six weeks of a one-day oral hearing, the UPC apparently aims to complete CFI proceedings within 11-14 months.

With time to trial in US district court patent litigation taking a median 2.4 years,2 the UPC system provides at least the promise for faster resolutions. Indeed, the UPC timeline more closely resembles timelines for IPR and post grant review (PGR) proceedings, spanning 18 months from petition to decision. Unlike the PTAB, however, the UPC can extend deadlines, and it remains uncertain whether the UPC can attain or sustain such a fast-paced schedule. The speed to resolution that the UPC can truly realise will certainly factor into enforcement strategies and the attractiveness of the system.


Discovery at the UPC will be the biggest hurdle from the perspective of a US attorney. In UPC actions, a party alleging infringement may seek an order to preserve evidence. The UPC may inform the defendant (or potential defendant) of the application and invite it to object, taking into consideration the alleged infringer's challenges to the facts and reasons why the action will fail in deciding whether to issue the order. Assuming preservation, evidence available to a party "regarding a statement of fact that is contested or likely to be contested" by the other party must be produced. The UPC may also order a party to produce evidence that lies "in the control" of a party concerning any statement of fact. If a party presents "reasonably available and plausible evidence" supporting its claims and "specified evidence" that lies "in the control" of the other party or a third party, the UPC may grant a "reasoned" request for production of that evidence.

Despite efforts to balance reducing discovery costs with preserving relevant documents in U.S. district court litigations, evidence preservation and discovery standards remain broad and costly, with discovery "proportional to the needs of the case" still encompassing evidence that "need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable."3 Comparatively, UPC discovery promises to be more limited and not by right. Thus, once again, it is more similar to discovery at the PTAB. The difference in extent of discovery is probably the most significant difference to consider when bringing patent enforcement actions in the U.S. and the UPC. UPC discovery may prove advantageous if discovery is more easily obtained, while complex cases may favour seeking broad U.S.-style discovery.


The UPC may determine damages during a separate proceeding, with the successful party having up to one year from the final decision on the merits on both infringement and validity to apply for a damage determination. The application may include a request for an order "to lay open books" and must indicate the redress sought (damages, license fees, profits), in particular calculations concerning lost profits or the infringer's profits.

U.S. courts awarded an overall median damage amount of $5.4 million over the past 20 years,4 and it obviously remains to be seen how UPC damages will compare. In contrast to the UPC, US courts can award running royalties as well as enhanced damages for willful infringement (i.e., triple damages), whereas UPC damages are limited to "the harm actually suffered" and cannot be punitive. But attorneys' fees are generally not available in the U.S., only in "exceptional" cases that stand out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party's litigating position,5 while at the UPC, the Rules contemplate the unsuccessful party paying attorneys' fees. This could encourage UPC litigation to rival U.S. litigation and minimise any concern regarding lower damage awards.

Provisional Measures

The UPC may order "provisional measures," including issuing injunctions against the defendant, as well as seizing suspected infringing goods to prevent entry into or movement within channels of commerce. It remains to be seen how obtaining an injunction will compare to obtaining one in the U.S., but the UPC can conveniently issue seizure orders, akin to the ITC's ability to exclude entry of infringing goods into the U.S. or preclude dissemination of such goods in commerce.

What Does It All Mean?

There are many factors potential users of the UPC system will need to weigh when determining how to use the new UPC system as part of a global patent enforcement strategy. The perceived benefits of litigating in the UPC should be weighed against the benefits of litigating in the U.S. The UPC presents patentees with the uncertainty surrounding a fast and possibly lethal attack on their patent rights at any time in Europe that could be leveraged in the U.S. Of course, it remains to be seen how the handling of cases by different divisions will develop and how that level of predictability at the UPC compares to actions before district courts, the PTAB, the ITC, and the Federal Circuit in the U.S.


1 Procedures and Rules of the UPC discussed herein are based on the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court of 19 February 2013 and Rules of Procedure of the Unified Patent Court of 19 October 2015.

2PWC, 2015 Patent Litigation Study: A Change In Patentee Fortunes.

3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1) (Dec. 1, 2015).

4 PWC, 2015 Patent Litigation Study.

5 Octane Fitness, LLC v Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1749 (2014).

Previously published in CIPA Journal

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
2 Nov 2017, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

Join us for a two-part webinar series exploring recent developments in machine learning and other technologies that have greatly advanced artificial intelligence (AI) since its origins more than 50 years ago.

9 Nov 2017, Webinar, Washington, DC, United States

As part of Strafford Publications’ webinar series, Finnegan attorneys Adriana Burgy, Chris Johns, and Kai Rajan will discuss the Examiner Count System and provide strategies for interacting with examiners.

15 Nov 2017, Conference, California, United States

Finnegan is a Gold sponsor of the second annual Digital Media & IP Forum, hosted by World Congress.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.