Action no:
UPC_CoA_835/2024
APL_67638/2024
App_68645/2024

Procedural order
of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court
concerning an application under Rule 262.2 RoP,
issued on 20 January 2025

APPLICANT AND APPELLANT (DEFENDANT IN THE MAIN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE CFI)
1. Amazon Europe Core S.à.r.l., (Société à responsabilité limitée), 38 avenue John F. Kennedy, L-1855 Luxembourg, represented by Sanjay Balakrishnan, ibid.,
Appellant 1)
2. Amazon EU S.à r.l., (Société à responsabilité limitée), 38 avenue John F. Kennedy, L-1855 Luxembourg, represented by Jorrit van der Meulen, ibid.,
Appellant 2)
3. Amazon.com, Inc., 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle Washington 98109-5210, United States of America, represented by the Registered Agent: c/o Corporation Service Company, 300 Deschutes way SW STE MC-CSC1, Tumwater, WA, 98501, United States of America,
Appellant 3)
(hereinafter jointly: “Amazon“)
represented by: Dr. Steffen Steininger, M.Jur., Attorney-at-law and registered representative before the Unified Patent Court, Hogan Lovells International LLP,

DEFENDANT IN THE APPLICATION PROCEEDINGS AND RESPONDENT
Nokia Technologies Oy, Karakaari 7, 02610 Espoo, Finland (hereinafter "Nokia"),
represented by Tim Smentkowski, Attorney-at-law and registered representative before the Unified Patent Court, ARNOLD RUESS Rechtsanwälte PartmbB,

PATENT AT ISSUE
EP 2 661 892

PANEL AND DECIDING JUDGES:
This decision was issued by Panel 1 with the participation of
Klaus Grabinski, President of the Court of Appeal,
Peter Blok, legally qualified judge,
Emmanuel Gougé, judge-rapporteur and legally qualified judge.

LANGUAGE OF PROCEEDINGS:
German

IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
□ Order of the Court of First Instance of the Unified Patent Court, Local Division Munich of 16
December 2024
□ Action no: ORD_55998/2024, ACT_584119/2023, UPC_CFI_399/2023

SUMMARY OF FACTS
1. On 16 December 2024, the Local Division Munich of the Court of First Instance, in the context of a patent infringement proceeding, rejected Amazon's request for the disclosure of an unredacted version of several documents and information held by Nokia.
2. Amazon filed an appeal against the impugned order pursuant to Rule 220.1 RoP (APL 67638/2024, UPC_CoA_835/2024).
3. Together with this appeal, Amazon submitted an application pursuant to Rule 262A RoP (App 68644/2024, UPC_CoA_835/2024) as well as an application pursuant to Rule 262.2 RoP (App 68645/2024, UPC_CoA_835/2024). The latter is the subject of this procedural order.

APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT
4. Amazon requests
I. That the information from the appeal and from the Statement of grounds of appeal pursuant to
R. 220.1(c) & 225 ff. RoP dated 30 December 2024 (67638/2024), summarised below, be classified as confidential in accordance with Art. 58 UPCA in conjunction with R. 262 RoP:
· all text passages highlighted in grey and the corresponding illustrations, as well as the
annexes marked as “strictly confidential”, relating to the progression, content and timeline of the licence negotiations between the parties, as well as the content of the parties' license offers;
· all text passages highlighted in grey and the corresponding illustrations, as well as the annexes marked as “strictly confidential”, relating to the Defendant’s business model;
· all text passages highlighted in grey and the corresponding illustrations, as well as the annexes marked as “strictly confidential”, relating to information on the identity of the licensees and the content of the Claimant's license agreements, as well as the license agreements submited by the Claimant and related information.
II. That the Court order that the information classified as confidential must be treated as confidential by anyone who becomes aware of it due to their involvement in the present proceedings (as a party, representative, witness, expert, court staff, or in any other capacity) and may not be used or disclosed outside these court proceedings unless they have obtained knowledge of it outside the proceedings.
III. That the Court order that the obligation of confidentiality pursuant to Item II shall continue to apply even after the conclusion of the court proceedings, unless the disputed information becomes otherwise known or readily accessible to persons who typically have access to such information.
IV. That it be noted that, in the event of a culpable contravention, the Court may impose a recurring penalty payment on the liable party for each contravention and enforce it immediately.
V. That the information classified as confidential in Item I be excluded from the case files that will be available to third parties (Art. 58 UPCA in conjunction with R. 262.1(b) & 262.2 RoP).
VI. That, in accordance with R. 115 RoP, any oral hearing that deals with information classified as confidential in Item I be held behind closed doors.
VII. That, by analogy with R. 115 RoP, those parts of the grounds for the decision that deal with information classified as confidential in Item I be withheld from the public.
VIII. That any information classified as confidential in Item I be redacted from the grounds for the decision or from other communications prior to publication.
GROUNDS FOR THE ORDER
5. Requests I and V are valid under Art. 58 UPCA in conjunction with R. 262.2 RoP, as the Applicants have provided specific reasons. For the sake of clarity, requests I and V are summarised below in Item I of the orders.

6. Requests II and III, insofar as they relate to the parties and their representatives, shall be granted on a provisional basis. The Applicants have explained that the requests relate to confidential information. In addition, the appeal and the Statement of grounds of appeal are intended for the knowledge of the aforementioned group of persons, so that in that respect the Defendant's particular interest in confidentiality must be recognised.
7. Pursuant to Art. 82(4) UPCA, the reference to the ordering of penalty payments in the event that a party does not comply with an order of the Court, per request IV, can apply only to the parties and not to the representatives, although that does not exclude holding the parties liable for contraventions committed by their representatives. The maximum amount of the threatened penalty payment has been determined on the Court’s own initiative.
8. The orders on requests II and III are merely provisional, in order to give the Defendant in the application proceedings the opportunity to adopt a position in the context of the Statement of response according to R. 225.1 RoP.
9. Requests II and III must be rejected insofar as they relate to persons other than the parties or their representatives, since the Applicants have not yet demonstrated any particular interest in confidentiality in that regard. Insofar as the requests relate to court staff, there is also no legal basis, since neither Rule 262 nor Rule 262A RoP is applicable with regard to court staff. It should also be noted that court staff are subject to a duty of confidentiality that extends beyond their period of service, in accordance with Art. 5.3 of the Staff Regulations of the Unified Patent Court.
10. With respect to requests VI to VIII, there is currently no need for an order. A decision on these requests can – if relevant – be taken later in the proceedings.

PROCEDURAL ORDER
I. The Court orders that all text passages highlighted in grey in the appeal and the Statement of grounds of appeal dated 30 December 2024, and the corresponding illustrations as well as the annexes marked as “strictly confidential”, relating to
· the progression, content and timeline of the licence negotiations between the parties, as well as the content of the parties' license offers,
· the Defendant’s business model,
· information on the identity of the licensees and the content of the Claimant's license agreements, and also the license agreements submitted by the Claimant and related information, are to be treated as confidential per Art. 58 UPCA in conjunction with R. 262.2 RoP, and will not be included in the case files available to third parties.
II. The Court provisionally orders that
· the information that is identified in Item I and that is to be treated as confidential must be treated as confidential by the parties and their representatives and may not be used or disclosed outside these court proceedings unless they have obtained knowledge of it outside the proceedings.
· the obligation of confidentiality pursuant to Item I shall continue to apply even after the conclusion of the court proceedings, unless this information becomes otherwise known or readily accessible to persons who typically have access to such information.
III. The Court notes that, in the event of a culpable contravention of the obligation in Item III, the Court may impose on the respective party a recurring penalty payment of up to €250,000 for each contravention.
IV. Requests II to IV are rejected.
V. The Court orders that a decision on requests VI to VIII, on holding oral hearings behind closed doors and possibly issuing the grounds for the decision with partial redaction of the grounds for the decision, will be taken at the appropriate time.

This Order was issued on 20 January 2024.