comparemela.com


Tuesday, December 15, 2020
Conversant v. Daimler
As I already noted earlier this month, the Oberlandesgericht München (Munich Higher Regional Court) fundamentally disagrees with the Munich I Regional Court's approach to setting the amounts of collateral to be posted in the form of a bond or a security deposit when patent injunctions are enforced while an appeal is pending.
Meanwhile I've obtained a copy of an order by the appeals court in
Conversant v. Daimler, raising the security amount from 5.5 million euros to 146 million euros. That's an increase by more than a factor of 26--and a complete (with respect to this part of the dispute) victory for Daimler at this stage. It also means that Nokia-fed Conversant won't ever enforce a German injunction against Daimler over the patent-in-suit, as the troll probably can't afford this amount anytime soon and the patent is going to expire in about a month's time.

Related Keywords

Germany ,Munich ,Bayern ,German ,Harman Becker ,Nokia ,Linkedin ,I Regional Court ,Samsung ,Huawei ,Daimler ,Munich Higher Regional Court ,Mercedes ,Regional Court ,Nokia Fed Conversant ,ஜெர்மனி ,முனிச் ,பேயர்ன் ,ஜெர்மன் ,ஹர்மன் பெக்கர் ,நோக்கியா ,சென்டர் ,நான் பிராந்திய நீதிமன்றம் ,சாம்சங் ,ஹூவாய் ,டைம்லர் ,முனிச் அதிக பிராந்திய நீதிமன்றம் ,மெர்சிடிஸ் ,பிராந்திய நீதிமன்றம் ,

© 2025 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.