Corporate Counsel
  • Home
  • News
  • Surveys
  • Resources
  • Lawjobs
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Bookstore
  • Contact

Topics » IP Insider | Labor & Employment | From the Experts | On the Job | Moves | DC Watch | International

Home > German City Aims to be Patent Litigation Hotspot

Font Size: increase font decrease font

German City Aims to be Patent Litigation Hotspot

The court system in the German city Mannheim is vying to be the fastest—and most popular—in the country.

By Joseph Rosenbloom All Articles 

Focus Europe

January 9, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

The two windowless courtrooms in which patent cases are heard in the Rhineland city of Mannheim may lack grandeur, but their decisions are thundering around the world.

Tucked away on the ground floor of the concrete-gray Mann­heim District Court, the courtrooms are a major front in the global disputes over patents underlying smartphones and other popular digital devices. "If you ask people in Silicon Valley, they all know Mann­heim and compare it to the Eastern District of Texas," says Marcus Grosch, a Mannheim-based patent litigator with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan who has represented Google's Motorola Mobility Division in the city's patent courts. Lightning-quick resolution of patent infringement cases, of course, is the storied reputation of the Texas court. Patent litigators favor Mannheim because they say its courts are the swiftest in Europe for handling petitions for permanent injunctions. In recent years, companies suing in Mannheim court include, in addition to Motorola, such high-tech giants as Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., and Microsoft Corporation.

Germany has a bifurcated system in which the claim for an injunction and a challenge to a patent's validity move on separate tracks in different courts. The split system results in "the advantage of speed" on the injunction track in all German courts, notes Frank Peterreins, managing partner of Fish & Richardson's Munich office. "The requirement is that a defendant committed an infringing act," he says. "[If so] you can get an injunction." Rarely is an injunction stayed while a patent's validity is litigated to final judgment, which typically takes 18 months to two years in most German courts from the time an initial complaint is brought.

File suit in Mannheim, and you can obtain a permanent injunction in as little as eight months. A patent owner armed with an injunctive order, which can force an infringer to withdraw its product from Germany and thereby forfeit sales in Europe's largest economy, wields a "very good pressure tool to make a defendant think intensely about settling a worldwide dispute," says Tilman Müller-Stoy, a partner with the Munich-based IP firm of Bardehle Pagenberg.

In Germany, plaintiffs—including multinational ones—have wide forum-shopping latitude because a court has jurisdiction if a patented product is marketed over the Internet in its district. Litigators estimate that Düsseldorf attracts about half the 1,000 or so patent cases filed annually in Germany, Mannheim a quarter, and Munich one-fifth. Until a few years ago, Düsseldorf enjoyed a reputation as the swiftest in Germany, but its popularity resulted in a clogged court. The Mannheim court, which had revved up its speed by adding a second chamber in 2004, began to draw more cases as Düsseldorf's court slowed.

One of the cases in Mannheim that pitted two high-tech giants against each other, Microsoft and Motorola, illustrates the speed with which the court can move. In a complaint filed in July 2011, Motorola complained that Microsoft's Xbox game was infringing two of its H. 264 video-coding patents. The court granted an injunction in May 2012—less than nine months later.

Today, the courts in Düsseldorf, Munich, and Mannheim appear to be vying for the title of the fastest, and thus the most popular, court system in Germany. And there's potentially a lot at stake for the winner. Patent litigators say that judges in the three cities are staking a claim to be the logical locations for Germany's regional European patent courts, should a European Union proposal to establish a Unified Patent Court becomes a reality ["Courting Failure," Summer 2011].

This article originally appeared in Focus Europe.

This article originally appeared in Focus Europe under the headline “Mannheim Steamroller.”



Subscribe to Focus Europe

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Fish & Richardson
  • Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Xbox
  • Google Inc.
  • Unified Patent Court
  • Motorola, Inc.
  • European Union
  • Samsung Electronics Company Inc.
  • Apple Inc.
  • Microsoft Corporation

Key categories

    
  • Corporate & Business Law
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law
  • Litigation
  • Patent

Most viewed stories

    
  1. 3-D Printing: The Next Big Thing in IP Law?
    •      
  2. Best Legal Departments 2013
    •      
  3. U.S. Legal System Ranked as Most Costly
    •      
  4. Managing Relationships With Legal Project Management
    •      
  5. 6 Things In-House Counsel Must Know About E-Discovery
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

EEOC Gets Tough With Companies on Genetic Privacy

Retailers Facing Employment Law Vulnerabilities

Amid Spy Scandal, Russia Boots Baker & McKenzie Lawyer

Survey: Firm Leaders Admit Downturn's Permanent Impact

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Cisco E-Book Delivers Ethics on the Go

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Loaner Judges Helping Essex Cope With Persistent Vacancies
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Surrogate Faces Suspension for Political Activity, Drunken Driving
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Court System, Counties Agree on 3 Court Facility Upgrades

Guardian Who Delayed Final Account Must Pay Referee Fee
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Perelman's Case Against Arlin Adams Thrown Out

McVay Wins Superior Court Nod With Western Turnout
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Transocean, Halliburton, Anadarko Entities
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Filing Blunder To Cost $142,600
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court: Injured College Student Can't Sue State
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About Corporate Counsel   |
  • Contact Corporate Counsel   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media