GEIST:UPC Searchengine

ORD_50692/2024

ICPillar LLC v. SVF Holdco, Arm France SAS, Arm lreland Limited, Arm Poland Sp. z.o.o, Simulity Labs Limited, Arm Germany d.o.o, Arm Germany GmbH, Apical Limited, Arm Sweden AB, ARM Limited

Datum
2024-09-16
Kammer
Luxembourg (LU)
Verfahrensart
Appeal RoP220.2
Sprache
EN

Metadaten

Fall-IDORD_50692-2024-41b866f3640c
Aktenzeichen
RegisterzeichenORD_50692/2024
EntscheidungsreferenzORD_50692/2024
Schlagwörter
Leitsätze

Dokumente und Volltext

Textextraktion: pypdf | Seiten: 7

1 ORDER of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court issued on 16 September 2024 concerning security for costs HEADNOTE - The Court of Appeal shall of its own motion consider how to exercise its discretion under R.222.2 RoP. The Court of Appeal may therefore decide to disregard late filed requests, facts, and evidence even if these were not objected to by the other party. - From R.172.1 RoP it clearly follows that there is a duty to provide evidence that is already available to a party. - The Court has a discretionary power to request the production of evidence pursuant to R.172.2 RoP. It is not obliged to do so. - A bank guarantee issued by a bank licensed in the US does not provide adequate security, as R.158 RoP requires. As the reason for not allowing a bank guarantee to be is su ...