KPN files first SEP case at local division The Hague

Last Friday, patent judges and UPC representatives met in Amsterdam for the launch of the Dutch UPC Bench Bar Meeting and to discuss the topic “Best Practices for FRAND Proceedings Within the UPC”. Such meetings typically have the additional unspoken aim of improving the attractivity of the jurisdiction in question. Many litigators in the Netherlands are dissatisfied with the case numbers at the local division The Hague so far. Therefore, the news that KPN filed an SEP case against two Dutch and two German Oppo subidiaries at this division at the beginning of September comes at just the right time. As of today, the suit is deemed to have been served on Oppo and can be found in the UPC’s CMS (case IDs: ACT_49159/2024 and UPC_CFI_502/2024).

According to the latest official UPC statistics, the local division The Hague has only eight infringement and three PI cases so far. Now there are at least nine infringement claims, as KPN is accusing Oppo and One Plus of infringing EP 2 387 844 with its smartphones.

The patent protects a technology to manage associated sessions in a network and is relevant to multimedia streaming and the WebRTC standard. It has already survived an attack by Xiaomi at the EPO. The Opposition Division upheld the patent in August 2023. Xiaomi appealed the decision. KPN had previously opted out EP 844 but withdrew the opt-out in March 2024.

KPN is now seeking an injunction from Oppo at the UPC local division The Hague, particularly for the Netherlands, Germany, France, and Italy. Presiding judge Edger Brinkman and judge Margot Kokke will hear the case in English. The third judge has not yet been announced

So far this is KPN’s only UPC suit against Oppo. The companies are also fighting in two proceedings at the Regional Court Düsseldorf (case IDs: 4b O 27/22 and 4b O 44/22).

Bird & Bird and De Vries for KPN

Bird & Bird filed the UPC suit together with patent attorneys from Amsterdam firm De Vries & Metman. Both firms have a long relationship with the Dutch telecommunications company. For example, they have defended KPN against High Point for many years and also in a nullity case initiated by Verify IP. Dutch patent experts suspect Oppo is behind the latter.

The Bird & Bird team includes Amsterdam-based partners Peter van Gemert and Tjibbe Douma, as well as counsel Carlos van Staveren. Associates Sabrina Lodder, Anna Koster, Pippa van Hengel, and competition law lawyer Reshmi Rampersad provide support. Partner Erik Visscher from De Vries & Metman is part of the team. He is also leading the EPO opposition proceedings for KPN in which Xiaomi is attacking EP 844. Here, Dutch patent firm NLO represents Xiaomi.

Brinkhof or Hogan Lovells?

It is not yet known which law firm is representing Oppo. Recently, the Chinese mobile phone manufacturer has mainly relied on Dutch teams from two law firms.

Dutch leading firm Brinkhof has represented Oppo in several disputes against Nokia, Sisvel and KPN in the past. Currently, Brinkhof lawyers together with German IP firm Vossius & Partner under the brand Vossius & Brinkhof UPC litigators represent Oppo against three lawsuits filed by Panasonic at the local division Mannheim.

Hogan Lovells also has a good relationship with Oppo. The Amsterdam-based team recently represented the company against Philips concerning UMTS and LTE standards. The parties have since settled the dispute. In the mega-battle between Nokia and Oppo, an international Hogan Lovells team took the lead for Oppo, but in the Dutch proceedings Oppo relied on Brinkhof.

In the German proceedings at Düsseldorf Regional Court, Krieger Mes and patent attorneys from Cologne-based IP firms Bayer-Vorberg-Kayser are representing KPN. Oppo relies on lawyers from Klaka and patent attorneys from Gulde & Partner.