Nordic-Baltic Regional Division

UPC_ CFI_11/2023

DECISION
of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court
delivered on 8 September 2023

CLAIMANT:
Ocado Innovation Limited, Buildings One & Two Trident Place, Mosquito Way, AL10 9UL Hatfield,
United Kingdom
Representative authorised to accept service:
Anna Bladh Redzic, Sandart & Partners Advokatbyrå KB, Kungsgatan 28A,
111 35 Stockholm, Sweden
Other representatives:
Simon Ayrton, Tom Oliver & Joel Coles, Powell Gilbert (Europe) LLP, Pembroke House,
28-32 Pembroke Street Upper, Dublin 2, D02 EK84, Ireland

DEFENDANTS:
1. Autostore AS, Stokkastrandvegen 85, 5578 Nedre Vats, Norway
2. Autostore Sp. z o.o., ul. Ignacego Łukasiewicza 4, 75-202 Koszalin, Poland
3. Autostore System AB, c/o Hannes Snellman Advokatbyrå AB, Box 7801, 103 96 Stockholm,
Sweden
4. Autostore S.A.S., 55 Ter Avenue René Cassin, 69009 Lyon, France
5. Autostore System GmbH, IM Striep 10, 41069 Monchengladbach, Germany
6. Autostore System AT GmbH, St. Peter Gürtel 4, 8042 Graz, Austria
7. Autostore System Srl, Via Agnello, 8, 20121 Milano, Italy
8. Autostore System S.L, Edificio Coronales, Bahía de Pollensa 12, 2nd floor, 28042 Madrid, Spain
Representatives for the defendants:
Laura Ramsay & Annabel Beacham, DEHNS, St Bride’s House, 10 Salisbury Square,
London, EC4Y 8JD, United Kingdom

PATENT AT ISSUE
European patent n° EP3653540

DIVISION
Nordic-Baltic Regional Division

LANGUAGE
English

DECIDING JUDGES
This decision has been delivered by the presiding judge Stefan Johansson (judge rapporteur) and
the legally qualified judges Kai Härmand and Petri Rinkinen.

SUMMARY OF FACTS
In June 2023, the Claimant brought an infringement action against the Defendants, requesting the
Court to declare that European Patent No. EP 3 653 540 had been infringed in certain European
States, and to issue orders (including permanent injunctions) based on those alleged
infringements.
Even before all Defendants formally have been served the statement of claim, the Claimant has
informed the Court that the parties and their affiliates have concluded a settlement and that the
settlement agreement provides that the Claimant shall withdraw this infringement action. This has
been confirmed by the Defendants.

INDICATION OF THE PARTIES’ REQUESTS
The Claimant has requested the Court to:
a) declare the proceedings closed;
b) order the decision to be entered on the register; and
c) if the Court finds it necessary to make an order as to costs, order that each party shall bear
its own costs.
Furthermore, the Claimant has requested the Court to reimburse the Claimant EUR 18 600, being
60 % of the total Court fees paid by the Claimant in these proceedings.
The Defendants have confirmed the settlement and their agreement to the withdrawal of the
action. The Defendants have also confirmed that they will not seek reimbursement of costs and
that they agree that the Court issues no order as to the costs. To the extent that the Court deems
it necessary to make such an order, they have agreed to an order imposing their own costs on each
Party.

GROUNDS FOR THE DECISION
According to Rule 265 of the Rules of Procedure (RoP), a Claimant may apply to withdraw its action
as long as there is no final decision. The Court shall decide on such an application to withdraw the
action after hearing the other party. The application to withdraw shall not be permitted if the other
party has a legitimate interest in the action being decided by the Court.
If withdrawal is permitted, the Court shall:
a) give a decision declaring the proceedings closed;
b) order the decision to be entered on the register; and
c) issue a cost decision in accordance with Part 1, Chapter 5.
If an action is withdrawn before the closure of the written procedure, the party liable for the Court
fees shall – after a reasoned application – normally be reimbursed by 60 % of the fixed and value-
based Court fees (Rule 370.9 and 370.11 RoP). The value-based fee depends on the value of the
infringement action, which shall be determined during the interim procedure.
In these proceedings, the Claimant has withdrawn its action before the closure of the written
procedure and the Defendants have confirmed the settlement and their agreement to the
withdrawal of the action. Therefore, the proceedings shall be declared closed and the decision
shall be entered on the register. Since the parties have agreed to and prefer that the Court does
not issue an order as to their costs in these proceedings, the Court will refrain from issuing such
an order.
In its statement of claim, the Claimant has estimated the value of the dispute and the requested
relief at EUR 3 000 000, and therefore paid a total fee to the Court of EUR 31 000. The estimation
of the value has not been challenged by the Defendants and is accepted by the Court.
Since the action has been withdrawn even before all defendants formally have been served the
statement of claim, the Claimant shall be reimbursed by 60 % of EUR 31 000, which is EUR 18 600.

DECISION
- The Court declares these proceedings closed.
- The decision on the closure of the proceedings to be entered on the register.
- The value of the infringement action is EUR 3 000 000.
- The Court shall reimburse the Claimant EUR 18 600, which is 60 % of the Court fees paid by the
Claimant in these proceedings.

DECISION DETAILS
Decision on application 559475/2023
Application type: Application on withdrawal (RoP 265) and reimbursement (Rule 370.9)
Main proceeding: ACT_459791/2023
UPC number: UPC_CFI_11/2023
Action type: Infringement Action
Done and delivered in Stockholm on 8 September 2023.

NAMES AND SIGNATURES
Judges
Presiding judge: Stefan Johansson
Legally qualified judge: Kai Härmand
Legally qualified judge: Petri Rinkinen
For the Deputy-Registrar
Clerk: Isabel Pais Iglesias

INFORMATION ABOUT APPEAL
An appeal against the present Decision may be lodged at the Court of Appeal, by any party which
has been unsuccessful, in whole or in part, in its submissions, within two months of the date of
its notification (Art. 73(1) UPCA, R. 220.1(a), 224.1(a) RoP).