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 2026

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

Cookies Settings

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

Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Gift this article