ARTICLE
14 May 2026

LD Düsseldorf, April 30, 2026, Dismissal Of Confidentiality Order, UPC_CFI_351/2024, 595/2024

BP
Bardehle Pagenberg

Contributor

BARDEHLE PAGENBERG combines the expertise of attorneys-at-law and patent attorneys. As one of the largest IP firms in Europe, BARDEHLE PAGENBERG advises in all fields of Intellectual Property, including all procedures before the patent and trademark offices as well as litigation before the courts through all instances.
A party may make an application for a confidentiality order pursuant to R. 262A.1 RoP if it is seeking protection for information that it is required to disclose under the operative part of a court decision. However, the application must be made during the proceedings on the merits if it can be reasonably foreseen that confidentiality issues will arise.
Germany Intellectual Property
Bardehle Pagenberg are most popular:
  • within Privacy and Transport topic(s)

1. Key takeaways

A party may make an application for a confidentiality order pursuant to R. 262A.1 RoP if it is seeking protection for information that it is required to disclose under the operative part of a court decision. However, the application must be made during the proceedings on the merits if it can be reasonably foreseen that confidentiality issues will arise.

 

A party may make an application for a confidentiality order pursuant to R. 262A.1 RoP, even if it is not seeking to protect confidential information contained in their pleadings, but seeking for protection of information that it is required to disclose under the operative part of a court decision. This already follows from R. 190.1 RoP (in case the production of evidence is ordered, the court may order also confidentiality in that the evidence be disclosed to certain named persons only and be subject to appropriate terms of non-disclosure) and R. 191 RoP (order for communication of information + confidentiality). The same must apply in cases where the court orders the communication of information pursuant to Art. 67 UPCA (CoA, order of 29 January 2026, UPC_CoA_930/2025, para. 26 – EOFlow v. Insulet).

However, if the defendant can reasonably foresee that the orders and evidence requested by the claimant may require it to disclose confidential information, this should be raised by the defendant during the proceedings on the merits. Appropriate measures can then be taken to protect such confidential information in the order or decision where necessary. If a confidentiality request is filed thereafter, confidentiality issues generally do not stay the time period set for compliance with a penalty reinforced order (CoA, order of 14 October 2025, UPC_CoA_699/2025, para. 45 – Kodak v. Fujifilm). (mn. 16-17)

In the enforcement proceedings, it is no more possible to restrict as to how the information received based on the decision is used (e.g. not to disclose the information outside of the proceedings).

 

2. Division

Local Division Düsseldorf

3. UPC number

UPC_CFI_351/2024, UPC_CFI_595/2024

4. Type of proceedings

Application for confidentiality order (in the enforcement proceedings)

5. Parties

Claimant: Canon K.K.

Defendants: Katun Germany GmbH, Katun (E.D.C.) B.V., Katun Corporation, General Plastic Industrial Co., Ltd.

6. Patent(s)

EP 3 686 683

7. Body of legislation / Rules

R. 262A RoP

Click here to read the full report.

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.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More