Celerity is the exclusive licensee of the patents at issue in this case and has long collaborated with ASUS and Innovative Sonic Limited on the licensing and enforcement of these patents. In October 2023, the three companies jointly filed six patent infringement lawsuits against AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon, respectively, alleging that the 4G and 5G wireless networks operated by the three major U.S. telecommunications carriers infringed the relevant standard-essential patents.

On August 26, 2026, Huawei and HP officially announced that they had signed a multi-year global patent cross-licensing agreement. Under the agreement, HP has obtained a license to use several generations of Huawei’s Wi-Fi patents, while Huawei has obtained corresponding patent rights from HP. Both parties stated that the agreement was reached through amicable negotiations.

The plaintiff in this case, Fraunhofer, is a German research organization focused on applied technology R&D. It comprises multiple institutes that have long been engaged in the research and development of technologies such as communications, audio, and video, and also participates in standard-setting as well as the development and licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Previously, it joined the AAC patent pool as a licensor.

On August 21, 2026, the Korean Ministry of Intellectual Property announced amendments to the Patent Act, the Utility Model Act, and the Design Protection Act, aimed at addressing the issue of individuals and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) losing their patent rights due to insufficient funds or manpower, weak patent management capabilities, or simply due to errors.

Recently, agricultural machinery manufacturer John Deere has faced three lawsuits in Germany alleging infringement of 4G cellular standard-essential patents (SEPs). This marks the first time that cellular SEP enforcement actions have targeted an agricultural machinery manufacturer. The three lawsuits were filed by two different plaintiffs: Acer filed one lawsuit in the Mannheim Regional Court, case number 2 O 87/26; Beijing Jing Shi Intellectual Property Management Co., Ltd. filed two lawsuits in the First Regional Court of Munich, with case numbers 7 O 7293/26 and 7 O 7713/26, respectively.

On August 13, 2026, the Seventh Civil Chamber of the Munich Regional Court issued a 67-page set of FRAND guidelines, systematically summarizing the reasoning behind four significant SEP rulings heard by the chamber this year: Wilus v. ASUS, Nokia v. ASUS, Broadcom v. Renault, and ZTE v. Samsung.

The patent at issue in this case is EP 3 030 943, which primarily relates to a technical solution for robotic vacuum cleaners to perform cleaning tasks based on room information. The patent was acquired by the plaintiff, PAPST, in 2024 from the German company RoTrade Asset Management GmbH.

In this ruling, Micron requested that access to Z01M information be strictly limited to Yangtze Memory Technologies’ external counsel and internal assistants, citing two reasons. First, Yangtze Memory Technologies had previously agreed to have external counsel independently evaluate technical information regarding another Micron chip, the Y52P, effectively waiving its right to direct access to such information; therefore, its current request for internal personnel to access Z01M details constitutes a contradiction; Second, Yangtze Memory has been placed on the U.S. export control “Entity List,” and disclosing Z01M technical information to it may require a license from the U.S. government. Since license reviews follow a “presumption of denial” principle, Micron argued that it is “legally prohibited from disclosing” such information.

Recently, Philips filed a lawsuit with the Munich Regional Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), alleging that Shenzhen Baseus Technology Co., Ltd. and its affiliated companies have infringed on its EP2867997 patent. Baseus Technology has become the third Chinese charging accessories company that Philips has sued at the UPC based on this patent.

To help Chinese companies and legal professionals better understand the PMAC’s institutional framework, key features of its rules and practical application, IP Economy conducted an exclusive interview with the PMAC. The discussion examines the key changes introduced in the final rules, the Centre’s jurisdiction, its procedures from initiation to resolution, the resolution of FRAND disputes concerning standard?essential patents, and how Chinese companies can make effective use of the PMAC. It also provides practical insights for Chinese companies navigating patent litigation in Europe and strengthening cross?border patent risk management frameworks.