UPC Christmas Quiz 2025

As we celebrate another year of the Unified Patent Court in action and head into the festive season, we invite our readers to put their UPC knowledge to the test in the Kluwer UPC Christmas Quiz 2025.

We’ve prepared 20 multiple-choice questions covering key developments and insights from the past year. To take part, simply submit your answers by email to Anja Kramer at Kluwer: [email protected] no later than 17:00 CET on Friday, 12 December.

The entrant with the highest number of correct answers will win a copy of “The UPC Judge as EU Judge: Cooperation Between the Unified Patent Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union” by Gerben Hartman, kindly donated by the Kluwer team. If multiple participants achieve the same score, the winner will be selected at random and notified.

Good luck, and happy quizzing!

Image

1.    Which first instance division has seen fewest infringement actions filed to date (25 November 2025)?
a.    Hamburg Local Division
b.    Helsinki Local Division
c.    Vienna Local Division
d.    Nordic Baltic Regional Division

2.    How many panels will the Court of Appeal have as of next year?
a.    1
b.    2
c.    3
d.    4

3.    Which is located furthest (in a direct line) from the Court of Appeal?
a.    Helsinki Local Division
b.    Nordic-Baltic Regional Division, Tallinn court
c.    Lisbon Local Division
d.    Ljubljana seat of the PMAC

4.    Which party has filed the most infringement actions in the UPC to date (25 November 2025)?
a.    Panasonic
b.    Abbott Diabetes
c.    Nokia
d.    10x Genomics

5.    Which was the first division of the UPC to grant an injunction not to infringe a UK patent?
a.    Munich Local Division
b.    Paris Local Division
c.    Mannheim Local Division
d.    The Hague Local Division

6.    In which first instance Division have cases concerning technologies to surgical extractors, hemp-harvesting machines, and wireless meeting room systems been filed?
a.    Mannheim Local Division
b.    Brussels Local Division
c.    Paris Local Division
d.    Milan Central Division

7.    Up to how many countries does the UPC theoretically have jurisdiction over, depending on the facts of the case, following the CJEU decision in BSH v Electrolux?
a.    18
b.    27
c.    31
d.    39

8.    What is the approach taken to date by the UPC in relation to the scope of prior use defences?
a.    The defendant must prove the prior use in every country where the defence is raised
b.    The defendant need only prove the prior use in one of the countries in which the defence is raised
c.    The legal test for prior use at the UPC is unitary
d.    a and c above

9.    What approach did the Mannheim Local Division take to (in)sufficiency of broad claims in Fujifilm v Kodak?
a.    The patent need only enable one embodiment falling within the ambit of the claims
b.    The patent must enable substantially all embodiments falling within the ambit of the claim
c.    The patent must enable substantially all embodiments falling within the ambit of the claim, but only for functional claims
d.    The patent must enable one embodiment falling within the ambit of the claims as well as the alleged infringement

10.    In how many UPC cases to date (25 November 2025) has a final decision on the merits been made in a claim for a DNI?
a.    0
b.    1
c.    3
d.    5

11.    In Sanofi & Regeneron v Amgen, which of the following factors did the Court of Appeal not refer to when considering off-label infringement of a medical use patent by a ‘skinny label’ medicinal product?
a.    The extent or significance of the allegedly infringing use
b.    The market share of the claimed use compared to other uses
c.    What actions the alleged infringer has taken to influence the respective market either positively or negatively
d.    Whether the second medical use claim was in Swiss-type or EPC 2000 form

12.    In Alexion v Amgen & Samsung Bioepis, what approach did the Court of Appeal take to claim construction in light of the prosecution history?
a.    The file history is inadmissible on the question of claim construction
b.    The file history can be relevant where the patentee has made a narrowing claim amendment
c.    Views presented by the patentee and endorsed by the TBA can be an indication of the views of the person skilled in the art
d.    The patentee may not adopt a different position on claim construction at the UPC from that during opposition at the EPO

13.    How many references for a preliminary opinion has the UPC made to date (25 November 2025) to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Art. 38 UPCA and Art. 267 TFEU?
a.    0
b.    1
c.    3
d.    5

14.    Which of the following approaches did the Court of Appeal not adopt in relation to CJEU references in Seoul Viosys v expert e-Commerce
a.    The UPC cannot ask the CJEU to interpret the UPCA or the Rules of Procedure
b.    Only the Court of Appeal can refer questions to the CJEU
c.    The UPC must disapply of its own motion any rule or practice that is contrary to a provision of EU law with direct effect
d.    The UPC must interpret its own substantive and procedural law in a matter that is consistent with EU law

15.    How many auxiliary requests were filed by the patentee in Kunstoff v Häfele, which the Munich Local Division found to be procedurally burdensome and disproportionate in the context of the facts of that case?
a.    12
b.    55
c.    80
d.    101

16.    What approach did the Munich Local Division take in Brita v Aquashield as to what constitutes means relating to an essential element of the invention for the purposes of. Art 26 UPCA?
a.    The supplied means must embody the core of the invention
b.    The means must distinguish the claim from the prior art
c.    The means must not have been available at the priority/filing date
d.    The means can be any component that functionally interacts with a device to realise the inventive concept

17.    Under which Rule of Procedure may the UPC grant judgment in default?
a.    RoP 19
b.    RoP 131(c)
c.    RoP 355
d.    RoP 361

18.    What was the UPC budget for 2025?
a.    EUR 19 114 201 
b.    EUR 25 228 339
c.    EUR 30 344 347
d.    EUR 35 846 223

19.    Who of the following is not a member of the PMAC’s expert committee?
a.    Maija Tipaine
b.    Gordana Risin
c.    Petra Asperger
d.    Aleš Zalar

20.    Which of the questions above has a Christmas theme?