Podcasts about Liti

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I am welcoming you to episode 169 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann, co-founder of my patent law firm Michalski Hüttermann & Partner and a true expert on the Unified Patent Court. He has written several books about the new system and we talk about all the things that plaintiffs and defendants can learn from the first decisions of the court and what they mean for strategic decisions of the parties involved. But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you! The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is planning rule changes that would make it virtually impossible for third parties to challenge invalid patents before the patent office. Criticism has come from the EFF and other inventor rights advocates: the new rules would play into the hands of so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs), as those attacked would have few cost-effective ways to have questionable patents deleted. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports a new record in international patent applications: in 2024, around 3.7 million patent applications were filed worldwide – an increase of 4.9% over the previous year. The main drivers were Asian countries (China alone accounted for 1.8 million), while demand for trademark protection has stabilized after the pandemic decline. US rapper Eminem is taking legal action in Australia against a company that sells swimwear under the name “Swim Shady.” He believes this infringes on his famous “Slim Shady” brand. The case illustrates that even humorous allusions to well-known brand names can lead to legal conflicts. A new ruling by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) demonstrates its cross-border impact. In “Fujifilm v. Kodak,” the local chamber in Mannheim issued an injunction that extends to the UK despite Brexit. The UPC confirmed its jurisdiction over the UK parts of a European patent, as the defendant Kodak is based in a UPC member state. A dispute over standard patents is looming at the EU level: the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament voted to take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice. The reason for this is the Commission’s controversial withdrawal of a draft regulation on the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Parliament President Roberta Metsola is to decide by mid-November whether to file the lawsuit. In trademark law, USPTO Director Squires reported on October 31, 2025, that a new unit (“Trademark Registration Protection Office”) had removed approximately 61,000 invalid trademark applications from the registries. This cleanup of the backlog relieved the examining authority and accelerated the processing of legitimate applications. Now let's jump into the interview with Aloys Hüttermann: The Unified Patent Court Comes of Age – Insights from Prof. Aloys Hüttermann The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has moved from a long-discussed project to a living, breathing court system that already shapes patent enforcement in Europe. In a recent IP Fridays interview, Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – founder and equity partner at Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner and one of the earliest commentators on the UPC – shared his experiences from the first years of practice, as well as his view on how the UPC fits into the global patent litigation landscape. This article summarises the key points of that conversation and is meant as an accessible overview for in-house counsel, patent attorneys and business leaders who want to understand what the UPC means for their strategy. How Prof. Hüttermann Became “Mr. UPC” Prof. Hüttermann has been closely involved with the UPC for more than a decade. When it became clear, around 13 years ago, that the European project of a unified patent court and a unitary patent was finally going to happen, he recognised that this would fundamentally change patent enforcement in Europe. He started to follow the legislative and political developments in detail and went beyond mere observation. As author and editor of several books and a major commentary on the UPC, he helped shape the discussion around the new system. His first book on the UPC appeared in 2016 – years before the court finally opened its doors in 2023. What fascinated him from the beginning was the unique opportunity to witness the creation of an entirely new court system, to analyse how it would be built and, where possible, to contribute to its understanding and development. It was clear to him that this system would be a “game changer” for European patent enforcement. UPC in the Global Triangle: Europe, the US and China In practice, most international patent disputes revolve around three major regions: the UPC territory in Europe, the United States and China. Each of these regions has its own procedural culture, cost structure and strategic impact. From a territorial perspective, the UPC is particularly attractive because it can, under the right conditions, grant pan-European injunctions that cover a broad range of EU Member States with a single decision. This consolidation of enforcement is something national courts in Europe simply cannot offer. From a cost perspective, the UPC is significantly cheaper than US litigation, especially if one compares the cost of one UPC action with a bundle of separate national cases in large European markets. When viewed against the territorial reach and procedural speed, the “bang for the buck” is very compelling. China is again a different story. The sheer volume of cases there is enormous, with tens of thousands of patent infringement cases per year. Chinese courts are known for their speed; first-instance decisions within about a year are common. In this respect they resemble the UPC more than the US does. The UPC also aims at a roughly 12 to 15 month time frame for first-instance cases where validity is at issue. The US, by contrast, features extensive discovery, occasionally jury trials and often longer timelines. The procedural culture is very different. The UPC, like Chinese courts, operates without discovery in the US sense, which makes proceedings more focused on the written record and expert evidence that the parties present, and less on pre-trial disclosure battles. Whether a company chooses to litigate in the US, the UPC, China, or some combination of these forums will depend on where the key markets and assets are. However, in Prof. Hüttermann's view, once Europe is an important market, it is hard to justify ignoring the UPC. He expects the court's caseload and influence to grow strongly over the coming years. A Landmark UPC Case: Syngenta v. Sumitomo A particularly important case in which Prof. Hüttermann was involved is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo matter, concerning a composition patent. This case has become a landmark in UPC practice for several reasons. First, the Court of Appeal clarified a central point about the reach of UPC injunctions. It made clear that once infringement is established in one Member State, this will usually be sufficient to justify a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That confirmation gave patent owners confidence that the UPC can in fact deliver broad, cross-border relief in one go. Second, the facts of the case raised novel issues about evidence and territorial reach. The allegedly infringing product had been analysed based on a sample from the Czech Republic, which is not part of the UPC system. Later, the same product with the same name was marketed in Bulgaria, which is within UPC territory. The Court of Appeal held that the earlier analysis of the Czech sample could be relied on for enforcement in Bulgaria. This showed that evidence from outside the UPC territory can be sufficient, as long as it is properly linked to the products marketed within the UPC. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to state its view on inventive step. It confirmed that combining prior-art documents requires a “pointer”, in line with the EPO's problem-solution approach. The mere theoretical possibility of extracting a certain piece of information from a document does not suffice to justify an inventive-step attack. This is one of several decisions where the UPC has shown a strong alignment with EPO case law on substantive patentability. For Prof. Hüttermann personally, the case was also a lesson in oral advocacy before the UPC. During the two appeal hearings, the presiding judge asked unexpected questions that required quick and creative responses while the hearing continued. His practical takeaway is that parties should appear with a small, well-coordinated team: large enough to allow someone to work on a tricky question in the background, but small enough to remain agile. Two or three lawyers seem ideal; beyond that, coordination becomes difficult and “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A Game-Changing CJEU Decision: Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux Surprisingly, one of the most important developments for European patent litigation in the past year did not come from the UPC at all, but from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux, the CJEU revisited the rules on cross-border jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia). Previously, under what practitioners often referred to as the GAT/LuK regime, a court in one EU country was largely prevented from granting relief for alleged infringement in another country if the validity of the foreign patent was contested there. This significantly limited the possibilities for cross-border injunctions. In Bosch, the CJEU changed course. Without going into all procedural details, the essence is that courts in the EU now have broader powers to grant cross-border relief when certain conditions are met, particularly when at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state. The concept of an “anchor defendant” plays a central role: if you sue one group company in its home forum, other group companies in other countries, including outside the EU, can be drawn into the case. This has already had practical consequences. German courts, for example, have issued pan-European injunctions covering around twenty countries in pharmaceutical cases. There are even attempts to sue European companies for infringement of US patents based on acts in the US, using the logic of Bosch as a starting point. How far courts will ultimately go remains to be seen, but the potential is enormous. For the UPC, this development is highly relevant. The UPC operates in the same jurisdictional environment as national courts, and many defendants in UPC cases will be domiciled in UPC countries. This increases the likelihood that the UPC, too, can leverage the broadened possibilities for cross-border relief. In addition, we have already seen UPC decisions that include non-EU countries such as the UK within the scope of injunctions, in certain constellations. The interaction between UPC practice and the Bosch jurisprudence of the CJEU is only beginning to unfold. Does the UPC Follow EPO Case Law? A key concern for many patent owners and practitioners is whether the UPC will follow the EPO's Boards of Appeal or develop its own, possibly divergent, case law on validity. On procedural matters, the UPC is naturally different from the EPO. It has its own rules of procedure, its own timelines and its own tools, such as “front-loaded” pleadings and tight limits on late-filed material. On substantive law, however, Prof. Hüttermann's conclusion is clear: there is “nothing new under the sun”. The UPC's approach to novelty, inventive step and added matter is very close to that of the EPO. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears frequently in UPC decisions. Intermediate generalisations are treated with the same suspicion as at the EPO. In at least one case, the UPC revoked a patent for added matter even though the EPO had granted it in exactly that form. The alignment is not accidental. The UPC only deals with European patents granted by the EPO; it does not hear cases on purely national patents. If the UPC were more generous than the EPO, many patents would never reach it. If it were systematically stricter, patentees would be more tempted to opt out of the system. In practice, the UPC tends to apply the EPO's standards and, where anything differs, it is usually a matter of factual appreciation rather than a different legal test. For practitioners, this has a very practical implication: if you want to predict how the UPC will decide on validity, the best starting point is to ask how the EPO would analyse the case. The UPC may not always reach the same result in parallel EPO opposition proceedings, but the conceptual framework is largely the same. Trends in UPC Practice: PIs, Equivalents and Division-Specific Styles Even in its early years, certain trends and differences between UPC divisions can be observed. On preliminary injunctions, the local division in Düsseldorf has taken a particularly proactive role. It has been responsible for most of the ex parte PIs granted so far and applies a rather strict notion of urgency, often considering one month after knowledge of the infringement as still acceptable, but treating longer delays with scepticism. Other divisions tend to see two months as still compatible with urgency, and they are much more cautious with ex parte measures. Munich, by contrast, has indicated a strong preference for inter partes PI proceedings and appears reluctant to grant ex parte relief at all. A judge from Munich has even described the main action as the “fast” procedure and the inter partes PI as the “very fast” one, leaving little room for an even faster ex parte track. There are also differences in how divisions handle amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. Munich has suggested that if a patentee needs to rely on claim amendments or auxiliary requests in a PI, the request is unlikely to succeed. Other divisions have been more open to considering auxiliary requests. The doctrine of equivalents is another area where practice is not yet harmonised. The Hague division has explicitly applied a test taken from Dutch law in at least one case and found infringement by equivalence. However, the Court of Appeal has not yet endorsed a specific test, and in another recent Hague case the same division did not apply that Dutch-law test again. The Mannheim division has openly called for the development of an autonomous, pan-European equivalence test, but has not yet fixed such a test in a concrete decision. This is clearly an area to watch. Interim conferences are commonly used in most divisions to clarify issues early on, but Düsseldorf often dispenses with them to save time. In practice, interim conferences can be very helpful for narrowing down the issues, though parties should not expect to be able to predict the final decision from what is discussed there. Sometimes topics that dominate the interim conference play little or no role in the main oral hearing. A Front-Loaded System and Typical Strategic Mistakes UPC proceedings are highly front-loaded and very fast. A defendant usually has three months from service of the statement of claim to file a full statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation. This is manageable, but only if the time is used wisely. One common strategic problem is that parties lose time at the beginning and only develop a clear strategy late in the three-month period. According to Prof. Hüttermann, it is crucial to have a firm strategy within the first two or three weeks and then execute it consistently. Constantly changing direction is a recipe for failure in such a compressed system. Another characteristic is the strict attitude towards late-filed material. It is difficult to introduce new documents or new inventive-step attacks later in the procedure. In some cases even alternative combinations of already-filed prior-art documents have been viewed as “new” attacks and rejected as late. At the appeal stage, the Court of Appeal has even considered new arguments based on different parts of a book already in the file as potentially late-filed. This does not mean that parties should flood the court with dozens of alternative attacks in the initial brief. In one revocation action, a plaintiff filed about fifty different inventive-step attacks, only to be told by the court that this was not acceptable and that the attacks had to be reduced and structured. The UPC is not a body conducting ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case actively and to ask parties to focus on the most relevant issues. Evidence Gathering, Protective Letters and the Defendant's Perspective The UPC provides powerful tools for both sides. Evidence inspection is becoming more common, not only at trade fairs but also at company premises. This can be a valuable tool for patentees, but it also poses a serious risk for defendants who may suddenly face court-ordered inspections. From the perspective of potential defendants, protective letters are an important instrument, especially in divisions like Düsseldorf where ex parte PIs are possible. A well-written protective letter, filed in advance, can significantly reduce the risk of a surprise injunction. The court fees are moderate, but the content of the protective letter must be carefully prepared; a poor submission can cause more harm than good. Despite the strong tools available to patentees, Prof. Hüttermann does not view the UPC as unfair to defendants. If a defendant files a solid revocation counterclaim, the pressure shifts to the patentee, who then has only two months to reply, prepare all auxiliary requests and adapt the enforcement strategy. This is even more demanding than at the EPO, because the patentee must not only respond to validity attacks but also ensure that any amended claims still capture the allegedly infringing product. It is entirely possible to secure the survival of a patent with an auxiliary request that no longer covers the defendant's product. In that scenario, the patentee has “won” on validity but lost the infringement case. Managing this tension under tight time limits is a key challenge of UPC practice. The Future Role of the UPC and How to Prepare Today the UPC hears a few hundred cases per year, compared with several thousand patent cases in the US and tens of thousands in China. Nevertheless, both the court itself and experienced practitioners see significant growth potential. Prof. Hüttermann expects case numbers to multiply in the medium term. Whether the UPC will become the first choice forum in global disputes or remain one pillar in parallel proceedings alongside the US and China will depend on the strategies of large patentees and the evolution of case law. However, the court is well equipped: it covers a large, economically important territory, is comparatively cost-effective and offers fast procedures with robust remedies. For companies that may end up before the UPC, preparation is essential. On the offensive side, that means building strong evidence and legal arguments before filing, being ready to proceed quickly and structured, and understanding the specific styles of the relevant divisions. On the defensive side, it may mean filing protective letters in risk-exposed markets, preparing internal processes for rapid reaction if a statement of claim arrives, and taking inspection requests seriously. Conclusion The Unified Patent Court has quickly moved from theory to practice. It offers pan-European relief, fast and front-loaded procedures, and a substantive approach that closely mirrors the EPO's case law. At the same time, national and EU-level developments like the Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision are reshaping the jurisdictional framework in which the UPC operates, opening the door for far-reaching cross-border injunctions. For patent owners and potential defendants alike, the message is clear: the UPC is here to stay and will become more important year by year. Those who invest the time to understand its dynamics now – including its alignment with the EPO, the differences between divisions, and the strategic implications of its procedures – will be in a much better position when the first UPC dispute lands on their desk. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Rolf Claessen:Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann. He is founder and equity partner of my firm, Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner. More importantly for today's interview, he has written several books about the Unified Patent Court. The first one already came out in 2016. He is co-editor and author of one of the leading commentaries on the UPC and has gained substantial experience in UPC cases so far – one of them even together with me. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays again, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you for inviting me, it's an honour. How did you get so deeply involved in the UPC? Rolf Claessen:Before we dive into the details, how did you end up so deeply involved in the Unified Patent Court? And what personally fascinates you about this court? Aloys Hüttermann:This goes back quite a while – roughly 13 years. At that time it became clear that, after several failed attempts, Europe would really get a pan-European court and a pan-European patent, and that this time it was serious. I thought: this is going to be the future. That interested me a lot, both intellectually and practically. A completely new system was being built. You could watch how it evolved – and, if possible, even help shape it a bit. It was also obvious to me that this would be a complete game changer. Nobody expected that it would take until 2023 before the system actually started operating, but now it is here. I became heavily interested early on. As you mentioned, my first book on the UPC was published in 2016, in the expectation that the system would start soon. It took a bit longer, but now we finally have it. UPC vs. US and China – speed, cost and impact Rolf Claessen:Before we go deeper into the UPC, let's zoom out. If you compare litigation before the UPC with patent litigation in the US and in China – in terms of speed, cost and the impact of decisions – what are the key differences that a business leader should understand? Aloys Hüttermann:If you look at the three big regions – the UPC territory in Europe, the US and China – these are the major economic areas for many technology companies. One important point is territorial reach. In the UPC, if the conditions are met, you can get pan-European injunctions that cover many EU Member States in one go. We will talk about this later in more detail. On costs there is a huge difference between the US and the UPC. The UPC is much cheaper than US litigation, especially once you look at the number of countries you can cover with one case if the patent has been validated widely. China is different again. The number of patent infringement cases there is enormous. I have seen statistics of around 40,000 infringement cases per year in China. That is huge – compared with roughly 164 UPC infringement cases in the first year and maybe around 200 in the current year. On speed, Chinese courts are known to be very fast. You often get a first-instance decision in about a year. The UPC is comparable: if there is a counterclaim for revocation, you are looking at something like 12 to 15 months for a first-instance decision. The US can be slower, and the procedure is very different. You have full discovery, you may have juries. None of that exists at the UPC. From that perspective, Chinese and UPC proceedings are more similar to each other than either is to the US. The UPC is still a young court. We have to see how influential its case law will be worldwide in the long run. What we already see, at least in Germany, is a clear trend away from purely national patent litigation and towards the UPC. That is inside Europe. The global impact will develop over time. When is the UPC the most powerful tool? Rolf Claessen:Let's take the perspective of a global company. It has significant sales in Europe and in the US and production or key suppliers in China. In which situations would you say the UPC is your most powerful tool? And when might the US or China be the more strategic battleground? Aloys Hüttermann:To be honest, I would almost always consider bringing a case before the UPC. The “bang for the buck” is very good. The UPC is rather fast. That alone already gives you leverage in negotiations. The threat of a quick, wide-reaching injunction is a strong negotiation tool. Whether you litigate in the US instead of the UPC, or in addition, or whether you also go to China – that depends heavily on the individual case: where the products are sold, where the key markets are, where the defendant has assets, and so on. But in my view, once you have substantial sales in Europe, you should seriously consider the UPC. And for that reason alone I expect case numbers at the UPC to increase significantly in the coming years. A landmark UPC case: Syngenta vs. Sumitomo (composition patent) Rolf Claessen:You have already been involved in several UPC cases – and one of them together with me, which was great fun. Looking at the last 12 to 18 months, is there a case, decision or development that you find particularly noteworthy – something that really changed how you think about UPC litigation or how companies should prepare? Aloys Hüttermann:The most important UPC case I have been involved in so far is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo case on a composition patent. It has become a real landmark and was even mentioned in the UPC's annual report. It is important for several reasons. First, it was one of the first cases in which the Court of Appeal said very clearly: if you have established infringement in one Member State, that will usually be enough for a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That is a powerful statement about the reach of UPC relief. Second, the facts were interesting. The patent concerned a composition. We had analysed a sample that had been obtained in the Czech Republic, which is not a UPC country. Later, the same product was marketed under the same name in Bulgaria, which is in the UPC. The question was whether the analysis of the Czech sample could be used as a basis for enforcement in Bulgaria. The Court of Appeal said yes, that was sufficient. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to say something about inventive step. It more or less confirmed that the UPC's approach is very close to the EPO's problem-solution approach. It emphasised that, if you want to combine prior-art documents, you need a “pointer” to do so. The mere theoretical possibility that a skilled person could dig a particular piece of information out of a document is not enough. For me personally, the most memorable aspect of this case was not the outcome – that was largely in line with what we had expected – but the oral hearings at the appeal stage. We had two hearings. In both, the presiding judge asked us a question that we had not anticipated at all. And then you have about 20 minutes to come up with a convincing answer while the hearing continues. We managed it, but it made me think a lot about how you should prepare for oral hearings at the UPC. My conclusion is: you should go in with a team, but not too big. In German we say, “Zu viele Köche verderben den Brei” – too many cooks spoil the broth. Two or three people seems ideal. One of them can work quietly on such a surprise question at the side, while the others continue arguing the case. In the end the case went very well for us, so I can speak about it quite calmly now. But in the moment your heart rate definitely goes up. The CJEU's Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision – a real game changer Rolf Claessen:You also mentioned another development that is not even a UPC case, but still very important for European patent litigation. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes. In my view, the most important case of the last twelve months is not a UPC decision but a judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU): Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. This is going to be a real game changer for European IP law, and I am sure we have not seen the end of its effects yet. One example: someone has recently sued BMW before the Landgericht München I, a German court, for infringement of a US patent based on acts in the US. The argument is that this could be backed by the logic of Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. We do not know yet what the court will do with that, but the fact that people are trying this shows how far-reaching the decision might be. Within the UPC we have already seen injunctions being issued for countries outside the UPC territory and even outside the EU, for example including the UK. So you see how these developments start to interact. Rolf Claessen:For listeners who have not followed the case so closely: in very simple terms, the CJEU opened the door for courts in one EU country to rule on patent infringement that took place in other countries as well, right? Aloys Hüttermann:Exactly. Before Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux we had what was often called the GAT/LuK regime. The basic idea was: if you sue someone in, say, Germany for infringement of a European patent, and you also ask for an injunction for France, and the defendant then challenges the validity of the patent in France, the German court cannot grant you an injunction covering France. The Bosch decision changed that. The legal basis is the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia), which deals with jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters in the EU. It is not specific to IP; it applies to civil cases generally, but it does have some provisions that are relevant for patents. In Bosch, a Swedish court asked the CJEU for guidance on cross-border injunctions. The CJEU more or less overturned its old GAT/LuK case law. Now, in principle, if the defendant is domiciled in a particular Member State, the courts of that state can also grant cross-border relief for other countries, under certain conditions. We will not go into all the details here – that could fill a whole separate IP Fridays episode – but one important concept is the “anchor defendant”. If you sue a group of companies and at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state, then other group companies in other countries – even outside the EU, for example in Hong Kong – can be drawn into the case and affected by the decision. This is not limited to the UPC, but of course it is highly relevant for UPC litigation. Statistically it increases the chances that at least one defendant will be domiciled in a UPC country, simply because there are many of them. And we have already seen courts like the Landgericht München I grant pan-European injunctions for around 20 countries in a pharmaceutical case. Rolf Claessen:Just to clarify: does it have to be the headquarters of the defendant in that country, or is any registered office enough? Aloys Hüttermann:That is one of the open points. If the headquarters are in Europe, then it is clear that subsidiaries outside Europe can be affected as well. If the group's headquarters are outside Europe and only a subsidiary is here, the situation is less clear and we will have to see what the courts make of it. Does the UPC follow EPO case law? Rolf Claessen:Many patent owners and in-house counsel wonder: does the UPC largely follow the case law of the EPO Boards of Appeal, or is it starting to develop its own distinct line? What is your impression so far – both on substantive issues like novelty and inventive step, and on procedural questions? Aloys Hüttermann:On procedure the UPC is, of course, very different. It has its own procedural rules and they are not the same as at the EPO. If we look at patent validity, however, my impression is that there is “nothing new under the sun” – that was the title of a recent talk I gave and will give again in Hamburg. Substantively, the case law of the UPC and the EPO is very similar. For inventive step, people sometimes say the UPC does not use the classical problem-solution approach but a more “holistic” approach – whatever that is supposed to mean. In practice, in both systems you read and interpret prior-art documents and decide what they really disclose. In my view, the “error bar” that comes from two courts simply reading a document slightly differently is much larger than any systematic difference in legal approach. If you look at other grounds, such as novelty and added matter, the UPC even follows the EPO almost verbatim. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears all over UPC decisions, even if the EPO case numbers are not always cited. The same is true for novelty. So the rule-based, almost “Hilbertian” EPO approach is very much present at the UPC. There is also a structural reason for that. All patents that the UPC currently deals with have been granted by the EPO. The UPC does not handle patents granted only by national offices. If the UPC wanted to deviate from EPO case law and be more generous, then many patents would never reach the UPC in the first place. The most generous approach you can have is the one used by the granting authority – the EPO. So if the UPC wants to be different, it can only be stricter, not more lenient. And there is little incentive to be systematically stricter, because that would reduce the number of patents that are attractive to enforce before the UPC. Patent owners might simply opt out. Rolf Claessen:We also talked about added matter and a recent case where the Court of Appeal was even stricter than the EPO. That probably gives US patent practitioners a massive headache. They already struggle with added-matter rules in Europe, and now the UPC might be even tougher. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, especially on added matter. I once spoke with a US practitioner who said, “We hope the UPC will move away from intermediate generalisations.” There is no chance of that. We already have cases where the Court of Appeal confirmed that intermediate generalisations are not allowed, in full alignment with the EPO. You mentioned a recent case where a patent was revoked for added matter, even though it had been granted by the EPO in exactly that form. This shows quite nicely what to expect. If you want to predict how the UPC will handle a revocation action, the best starting point is to ask: “What would the EPO do?” Of course, there will still be cases where the UPC finds an invention to be inventive while the EPO, in parallel opposition proceedings, does not – or vice versa. But those are differences in the appreciation of the facts and the prior art, which you will always have. The underlying legal approach is essentially the same. Rolf Claessen:So you do not see a real example yet where the UPC has taken a totally different route from the EPO on validity? Aloys Hüttermann:No, not really. If I had to estimate how the UPC will decide, I would always start from what I think the EPO would have done. Trends in UPC practice: PIs, equivalents, interim conferences Rolf Claessen:If you look across the different UPC divisions and cases: what trends do you see in practice? For example regarding timelines, preliminary injunctions, how validity attacks are handled, and how UPC cases interact with EPO oppositions or national proceedings? Aloys Hüttermann:If you take the most active divisions – essentially the big four in Germany and the local division in The Hague – they all try to be very careful and diligent in their decisions. But you can already see some differences in practice. For preliminary injunctions there is a clear distinction between the local division in Düsseldorf and most other divisions. Düsseldorf considers one month after knowledge of the infringement as still sufficiently urgent. If you wait longer, it is usually considered too late. In many other divisions, two months is still viewed as fine. Düsseldorf has also been the division that issued most of the ex parte preliminary injunctions so far. Apart from one special outlier where a standing judge from Brussels was temporarily sitting in Milan, Düsseldorf is basically the only one. Other divisions have been much more reluctant. At a conference, Judge Pichlmaier from the Munich division once said that he could hardly imagine a situation where his division would grant an ex parte PI. In his words, the UPC has two types of procedure: one that is fast – the normal main action – and one that is very fast – the inter partes PI procedure. But you do not really have an “ultra-fast” ex parte track, at least not in his division. Another difference relates to amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. In one recent case in Munich the court said more or less that if you have to amend your patent or rely on auxiliary requests in a PI, you lose. Other divisions have been more flexible and have allowed auxiliary requests. Equivalence is another area where we do not have a unified line yet. So far, only the Hague division has clearly found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and explicitly used a test taken from Dutch law. Whether that test will be approved by the Court of Appeal is completely open – the first case settled, so the Court of Appeal never ruled on it, and a second one is still very recent. Interestingly, there was another Hague decision a few weeks ago where equivalence was on the table, but the division did not apply that Dutch-law test. We do not know yet why. The Mannheim division has written in one decision that it would be desirable to develop an autonomous pan-European test for equivalence, instead of just importing the German, UK or Dutch criteria. But they did not formulate such a test in that case because it was not necessary for the decision. So we will have to see how that evolves. On timelines, one practical difference is that Düsseldorf usually does not hold an interim conference. That saves them some time. Most other divisions do hold interim conferences. Personally, I like the idea because it can help clarify issues. But you cannot safely read the final outcome from these conferences. I have also seen cases where questions raised at the interim conference did not play any role in the main oral hearing. So they are useful for clarification, but not as a crystal ball. Front-loaded proceedings and typical strategic mistakes Rolf Claessen:If you look at the behaviour of parties so far – both patentees and defendants – what are the most common strategic mistakes you see in UPC litigation? And what would a well-prepared company do differently before the first statement of claim is ever filed? Aloys Hüttermann:You know you do not really want me to answer that question… Rolf Claessen:I do! Aloys Hüttermann:All right. The biggest mistake, of course, is that they do not hire me. That is the main problem. Seriously, it is difficult to judge parties' behaviour from the outside. You rarely know the full picture. There may be national proceedings, licensing discussions, settlement talks, and so on in the background. That can limit what a party can do at the UPC. So instead of criticising, I prefer to say what is a good idea at the UPC. The system is very front-loaded and very fast. If you are sued, you have three months to file your statement of defence and your counterclaim for revocation. In my view, three months are manageable – but only if you use the time wisely and do not waste it on things that are not essential. If you receive a statement of claim, you have to act immediately. You should have a clear strategy within maybe two or three weeks and then implement it. If you change your strategy every few weeks, chances are high that you will fail. Another point is that everything is front-loaded. It is very hard to introduce new documents or new attacks later. Some divisions have been a bit generous in individual cases, but the general line is strict. We have seen, for example, that even if you filed a book in first instance, you may not be allowed to rely on a different chapter from the same book for a new inventive-step attack at the appeal stage. That can be regarded as late-filed, because you could have done it earlier. There is also case law saying that if you first argue inventive step as “D1 plus D2”, and later want to argue “D2 plus D1”, that can already be considered a new, late attack. On the other hand, we had a revocation action where the plaintiff filed about 50 different inventive-step attacks in the initial brief. The division then said: this does not work. Please cut them down or put them in a clear hierarchy. In the end, not all of them were considered. The UPC does not conduct an ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case and to tell the parties to limit themselves in the interest of a fair and efficient procedure. Rolf Claessen:I have the feeling that the EPO is also becoming more front-loaded – if you want to rely on documents later, you should file them early. But it sounds like the UPC is even more extreme in that regard. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, that is true. Protective letters, inspections and the defendant's perspective Rolf Claessen:Suppose someone from a company is listening now and thinks: “We might be exposed at the UPC,” or, “We should maybe use the UPC offensively against competitors.” What would you consider sensible first steps before any concrete dispute arises? And looking three to five years ahead, how central do you expect the UPC to become in global patent litigation compared to the US and China? Aloys Hüttermann:Let me start with the second part. I expect the UPC to become significantly more important. If we have around 200 cases this year, that is a good start, but it is still very small compared to, say, 4,000 to 5,000 patent cases per year in the US and 40,000 or so in China. Even François Bürgin and Klaus Grabinski, in interviews, have said that they are happy with the case load, but the potential is much larger. In my view, it is almost inevitable that we will see four or five times as many UPC cases in the not-too-distant future. As numbers grow, the influence of the UPC will grow as well. Whether, in five or ten years, companies will treat the UPC as their first choice forum – or whether they will usually run it in parallel with US litigation in major disputes – remains to be seen. The UPC would be well equipped for that: the territory it covers is large, Europe is still an important economy, and the UPC procedure is very attractive from a company's perspective. On sensible first steps: if you are worried about being sued, a protective letter can make a lot of sense – especially in divisions like Düsseldorf, where ex parte PIs are possible in principle. A protective letter is not very expensive in terms of court fees. There is also an internal system that ensures the court reads it before deciding on urgent measures. Of course, the content must have a certain quality; a poor protective letter can even backfire. If you are planning to sue someone before the UPC, you should be extremely well prepared when you file. You should already have all important documents and evidence at hand. As we discussed, it is hard to introduce new material later. One tool that is becoming more and more popular is inspection – not just at trade fairs, where we already saw cases very early, but also at company premises. Our firm has already handled such an inspection case. That is something you should keep in mind on both sides: it is a powerful evidence-gathering tool, but also a serious risk if you are on the receiving end. From the defendant's perspective, I do not think the UPC is unfair. If you do your job properly and put a solid revocation counterclaim on the table, then the patentee has only two months to prepare a full reply and all auxiliary requests. And there is a twist that makes life even harder for the patentee than at the EPO. At the EPO the question is mainly: do my auxiliary requests overcome the objections and are they patentable? At the UPC there is an additional layer: do I still have infringement under the amended claims? You may save your patent with an auxiliary request that no longer reads on the defendant's product. That is great for validity, but you have just lost the infringement case. You have kept the patent but lost the battle. And all of this under very tight time limits. That creates considerable pressure on both sides. How to contact Prof. Hüttermann Rolf Claessen:Thank you very much for this really great interview, Aloys. Inside our firm you have a nickname: “the walking encyclopedia of the Unified Patent Court” – because you have written so many books about it and have dealt with the UPC for such a long time. What is the best way for listeners to get in touch with you? Aloys Hüttermann:The easiest way is by email. You can simply write to me, and that is usually the best way to contact me. As you may have noticed, I also like to speak. I am a frequent speaker at conferences. If you happen to be at one of the conferences where I am on the programme – for example, next week in Hamburg – feel free to come up to me and ask me anything in person. But email is probably the most reliable first step. Rolf Claessen:Perfect. Thank you very much, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on IP Fridays again. Some of your long-time listeners may remember that a few years ago – when you were not yet part of our firm – we already did an episode on the UPC, back when everything was still very speculative. It is great to be back now that the system is actually in place and working. Rolf Claessen:I am very happy to have you back on the show.

As business owners, we are brave. We are gritty. We are the ones who raise our hands and say, “Hey, I'll be the one to lead. I'll open the storefront. I'll be the one who takes the risk.”But… we don't do any of this alone.We have:the mentors who guide usthe tools that keep us organizedthe experts we trustthe partners who cheer us onand the small business community that keeps the flame litI wanted to pause in this week of gratitude and say out loud what we all know is true:We are only able to serve, share, and show up because others pour into us.And that's exactly why I'm sharing my Tools I Love list today.Not because I get a small referral bonus, but because when something WORKS…when something makes our life easier…when something saves us time, money, or emotional bandwidth…We SHARE it. Because that's what good friends do. We share the recipe. We share the shortcut. We share the wisdom.Enjoy this episode and make sure you check out the referral page of my website to grab the all year long deals that they offer!Love today's podcast?

Vu sur Gare aux travaux… (Liti Liti) Pour ce nouveau numéro de Rien à voir, magazine de la rédaction d'Alternantes fm, nous accompagnons dans la rue Mamadou Khouma Gueye, premier réalisateur nantais à être programmé dans le cadre de la 47ème édition du Festival des trois continents dans la catégorie Sélection officielle – Compétition internationale . Mamadou Khouma Gueye est l'auteur de Liti […] Cet article provient de Radio AlterNantes FM

Ecoutez L'oeil de Philippe Caverivière du 06 novembre 2025.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Ecoutez L'oeil de Philippe Caverivière du 06 novembre 2025.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Ecoutez L'oeil de Philippe Caverivière du 06 novembre 2025.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Le prime pagine dei principali quotidiani nazionali commentate in rassegna stampa da Davide Giacalone. La criminalità in crescita, gli sfratti lampo, il referendum per la riforma della giustizia, i ragazzi uccisi per sbaglio, Trump e gli attacchi ai narcos, La 10° giornata del campionato di calcio di serie A. Ci ha raccontato tutto sulle partite giocate ieri Nicolò Pompei. Tennis, Jannik Sinner ha vinto il Masters 1000 di Parigi ed è tornato al primo posto del ranking atp. Ne abbiamo parlato con il nostro Massimo Caputi. Don Antonio Mazzi, fondatore della comunità Exodus, regala ogni giorno un pensiero, un suggerimento, una frase agli ascoltatori di RTL 102.5. Focus sulle gite scolastiche con l'intervista a Antonello Giannelli, presidente dell'Associazione Nazionale Presidi. Liti in condominio a partire dal caso di un 80enne siciliano i cui rumori molesti hanno richiesto l'intervento delle forze dell'ordine. Intervista a Fabrizio Albanese, avvocato esperto di diritto condominiale. L'attualità, commentata dal direttore dell'Ansa, Luigi Contu. All'interno di Non Stop News, con Massimo Lo Nigro, Enrico Galletti e Giusi Legrenzi.

Episodi 73! Tornem a parlar d'un dels temes preferits de l'audiencia: les bateries. Però aquesta vegada anem al nucli, a l'origen de tot: la química.Per entendre què hi ha dins d'una cel·la de liti i què ens depara el futur, ens acompanya en Jordi Jacas, investigador expert en materials per a bateries a l'IREC (Institut de Recerca d'Energia de Catalunya) i part de BATEC.Amb ell, fem un viatge des de la geologia (d'on surten els materials) fins a les químiques més avançades. Analitzem perquè el Cobalt és el "dolent" de la pel·lícula a les bateries NMC, explorem per què les LFP (Fosfat de Ferro Liti) són tan segures i duradores, i mirem cap al futur amb les bateries de Sodi (Na-ion) i les d'Estat Sòlid.Una classe sobre el cor de la mobilitat elèctrica!Estructura*:00:00 - Introducció i presentació de Jordi Jacas06:19 - La química del Càtode: NMC 19:02 - LFP (Fosfat de Ferro Liti)27:46- Bateries de Sodi40:15 - Bateries d'Estat Sòlid43:44 - Europa vs. Xina. Impacte social51:51 - Qüestionari finalMúsica: "Future Calm" by penguinmusic.Gràcies als nostres Patreons per fer-ho possible:- Xavier Anzuela- Aitor Querol* ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠La Nova Mobilitat ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠© 2022 by Miquel Testar & Martí Pascual is licensed under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CC BY-NC-SA 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Les opinions expressades en aquest podcast són personals dels productors i convidats i no de les empreses per a les que treballen. La Nova Mobilitat té el suport de Fulls d'Enginyeria d'Enginyers Industrials de Catalunya. ** El tema "Black Tourmaline" dels productors de música electrónica barcelonins "Four Far Lanes ©" ha estat utilitzat respectant la llicencia Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.

Massimo Rebotti analizza l'impatto sulla politica e sull'opinione pubblica italiane della vicenda della missione umanitaria per Gaza. Luigi Ippolito racconta dell'uomo che, davanti a una sinagoga della città britannica, ha assassinato a coltellate due persone (ferendone altre tre) prima di essere ucciso dai poliziotti di guardia. Francesca Basso parla delle posizioni emerse al vertice di Copenaghen su come rinforzare la capacità di difesa dell'Ue.I link di corriere.it:Troppi pregiudizi contro la FlotillaManchester, accoltellamento fuori da una sinagoga: due morti, ucciso anche l'aggressore. La polizia: «Terrorismo, arrestati due sospetti». L'attentato nel giorno dello Yom KippurDroni, allarme Ue: quella russa è guerra ibrida Ma i Paesi si dividono sul «muro»

Le prime pagine dei principali quotidiani nazionali commentate in rassegna stampa da Davide Giacalone. I dazi al 30% che porterebbero un danno enorme, lavoro e decreto coesione, Unicredit e Golden Power. Moto Gp. Questo weekend si correva in Germania. Il punto con il nostro inviato speciale Max Biaggi. Il Giro d'Italia Women di cui RTL 102.5 è radio ufficiale. Lo ha seguito per noi la nostra Ludovica Marafini. Ieri l'ultima tappa. Don Antonio Mazzi, fondatore della comunità Exodus, regala ogni giorno un pensiero, un suggerimento, una frase agli ascoltatori di RTL 102.5. Le liti condominiali sarebbero in crescita con un vero e proprio boom di cause pendenti. Ne abbiamo parlato con Francesco Burrelli, presidente ANACI. Ieri si è chiuso il torneo di Wimbledon. Il bilancio sui nostri azzurri impegnati nella competizione con noi il nostro Massimo Caputi. L'attualità , commentata da Ferruccio De Bortoli, editorialista Corriere della Sera. All'interno di Non Stop News, con Enrico Galletti, Massimo Lo Nigro e Giusi Legrenzi.

Una delle settimane più calde dell'anno è stata accompagnata, come ogni estate, da pubblicità e consigli sugli integratori “per il caldo” con elettroliti, sali minerali e altre sostanze per “assorbire meglio l'acqua”. Silvio Garattini, tra i farmacologi più rispettati in Italia, ha detto che «gli integratori non servono e sono troppo spinti dalla pubblicità», aggiungendo ulteriori elementi a un dibattito che prosegue da tempo. Vediamo cosa sono questi integratori, perché non sono farmaci e se sono davvero utili. Restiamo poi in tema, dedicandoci alle isole di calore e al perché in città fa così caldo. ⁠⁠⁠Il link per abbonarti al Post e ascoltare la puntata per intero.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Guido Olimpio racconta i dubbi dell'amministrazione americana sull'operazione militare in Iran, rinviata di almeno due settimane. Marco Cremonesi spiega il naufragio delle trattative per una legge sui governatori di regione. E Saverio Alloggio spiega le nuove norme su consumi energetici e riparabilità di cellulari e tablet.I link di corriere.it:La Casa Bianca conferma: «Witkoff ha avuto contatti con l'Iran». Colpito l'ospedale a Beer Sheva. Netanyahu: «Khamenei? Nessuno è immune»Terzo mandato, nuova lite nella maggioranza. Forza Italia: per noi discorso chiuso. E vuole riaprire sullo ius scholaeL'etichetta energetica per smartphone arriva il 20 giugno. E cambia tutto: non è solo un adesivo. Come leggerla

ROMA (ITALPRESS) - "Per me e per tutto il Consiglio non è solo una responsabilità ma anche un grande onore quello di rappresentare la federazione nell'era post-Chimenti". Lo ha detto il presidente della Federazione Italiana Golf, Cristiano Cerchiai, in un'intervista nella sede romana dell'Italpress. "Il golf non è più uno sport per ricchi o per meno giovani, sta a noi comunicarlo", ha aggiunto.(ITALPRESS).mc/mrv

No episódio 69 do Papo na Arena, nossos hosts ⁠⁠⁠Arthur⁠⁠⁠ e ⁠⁠⁠Aíquis⁠⁠⁠ convidam Beatriz Kinguti, CPO da HealthTech LITI #JABÁ ASSINATURA DA ARENA COM R$150 OFF: Acesso a TODOS cursos, eventos, encontros da comunidade, além de sorteio TODA SEMANA: >> ASSINE AQUI

I was joined by recent LPGA Tour card holder in the lovely Robi Liti right after going back to Final Stage of Q School to try and regain her LPGA Tour playing privileges.  The 29 year old from beautiful Siena in Tuscany, Italy went to Arizona State University (ASU) and established a solid Amateur career as a 5x Italian National Champion at various levels, participated in World Amateur Team Championship twice & European Team Championships for Italy, was a finalist at British Girls Championship, won the prestigious PING/ASU Invitational in 2017 while also winning the All American Scholar of the Year and the NCAA Elite 90 Awards in 2018.  Robi would turn pro at the end of 2018 and would gain starts on Epson Tour from 2019. Robi's career would turn in 2023 after a background change in coach would help Roberta regain some confidence which would result in 9 Top 10's on Epson Tour including a T2nd at Black Desert. Overall Liti would finish 8th in Epson Tour Order of Merit to gain full status on LPGA Tour for 2024. We find out how she got on in 2024 in her own words!  We also get to talk about the rise of Italian Golf especially in the women's game with talented players like Benedetta Moresco and Carolina Melgrati coming out the college system. We also chat some Calcio as Roberta although from Tuscany is a Juventus fan.   Reminder that votes close on 13th January for Sports Podcast Awards with the winners getting announced on 30th January. The support so far has been amazing and overwhelming at times. Would love the votes to keep coming. Keep voting for Chasing Pars as Best Golf Podcast!! Be sure to Like, Subscribe,  Rate and Review on Apple Podcasts which hugely elevates the shows growth and Download in Podbean! Thanks.

Kringvarpið og Kvinnulandsliðið hava kveikt poddarhugin hjá  Trokbrøðrunum, sum eftir ein longri steðg, hava sett sær fyri at máta átrokandi hondbóltsfepurin í Basel. Til tess hava vit hitt Biritu Wardum og Katrina Dam á Neystabø - Tær seta orð á hvussu tær sóu dystin ímóti Sveis úr føroyska sjónarhorninum.  Harafturat hitta vit Mariu Pálsdóttir Nólsoy og Simon Olsen, sum greiða frá sínum áskoðanum á dystin ímóti Kroatia Og sum altíð: Dagsins leikarar, dagsins detalja og annað átrokandi

(00:43) Monica Guerzoni parla delle tensioni tra i due vicepremier Matteo Salvini e Antonio Tajani, che hanno molto irritato Giorgia Meloni.(07:28) Cesare Giuzzi racconta il quartiere della periferia Sud di Milano, teatro di scontri fra giovani e forze dell'ordine dopo la morte di un 19enne inseguito dalla polizia.(15:21) Guido Olimpio ricostruisce il mistero della nave cargo cinese che ha danneggiato per due volte le strutture sottomarine di comunicazione internet.I link di corriere.it:Meloni arrabbiata (e delusa), il gelo con Tajani e SalviniMilano, che cosa sta succedendo al quartiere CorvettoCavi sottomarini tranciati nel Baltico: i sospetti degli 007 sul cargo cinese

"Uccide la moglie e si toglie la vita”, “Uccide il marito e il figlio”, “Uccide la moglie, la suocera e un incolpevole vicino di casa”. Quante volte avrai letto titoli del genere? Liti dopo liti che scaturiscono in tragedia. Ma tutto ciò è evitabile? In questo episodio bonus affronteremo 12 modi per litigare senza disintegrare l'altro e...finire come protagonista nei miei podcast (!)Buon Ascolto (!)Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/accademia-di-criminologia--1771463/support.

Aujourd'hui dans le BOOST ! :  Mon enfant a déjà fait ça et on en parle encore… «Gaben ça» : Gab dérangé en pleine job  Qu'est-ce que vous perdez tout le temps ?  Booster Games : Flo nous fait jouer à «Devine le générique d'émission» Bonne écoute :)  

durée : 00:03:09 - Terre Vivante

The 2024 Weightlifting NZ National Championships will see all of Aotearoa's best Weightlifters come and battle for the national title in their given weight category. From debut performances on a national stage to Olympians defending their titles, the WNZ National Champs never ceases to provide inspiration and entertainment for all as we watch some of the strongest athletes do what they do best. D'Arcy Waldegrave catches up with Olympian David Liti to preview the event. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Au cours de ces dernières années, des litières alternatives à la paille sont de plus en plus utilisées pour les équins. Dans le cadre du projet Valfumier, qui avait comme objectif de rechercher des solutions de valorisation du fumier équin, des études ont été entreprises pour mieux connaître les différentes litières.Ce podcast présentera dans un premier temps les caractéristiques des litières alternatives à la paille. Les notions de bien-être et de santé des équidés seront abordées en lien avec l'utilisation de ces différentes litières. Les données des travaux sur la présence de particules respirables liées à la litière employée montrent qu'il peut y avoir des conséquences négatives sur le cheval comme chez l'homme. Les notions de conditionnement et stockage ainsi que les prix observés en 2024 seront présentés. Un exemple de coût d'entretien est proposé pour comparer l'utilisation de paille à celle de copeaux de bois.Pour aller plus loin :• Site internet - Val'Fumier• Contact du projet - Val'Fumier• Article équipédia - Choisir sa litière• Article équipédia - Litière et bien-être• Article équipédia - Litières et particules respirables dans les écuriesSi vous souhaitez en savoir plus sur le sujet, rendez-vous sur notre site internet equipedia.ifce.fr où vous trouverez tous les travaux de nos experts. Vous pouvez aussi nous rejoindre sur notre groupe Facebook équipédia, sciences et innovations équines pour plus de contenus. Pour ne manquer aucun épisode, abonnez-vous, partagez, commentez et n'hésitez pas à laisser 5 étoiles sur Apple Podcasts et Spotify.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

(00:46) Francesca Basso parla dell'intervento del primo ministro ungherese al Parlamento europeo e delle reazioni che ne sono seguite.(07:25) Lorenzo Cremonesi descrive la situazione nel territorio russo occupato dagli ucraini, in cui è riuscito a entrare. (13:03) Viviana Mazza anticipa il contenuto di alcune parti di «War», l'ultimo libro di Bob Woodward in cui il giornalista svela le tensioni tra il presidente degli Stati Uniti e il capo del governo israeliano.I link di corriere.it:Il contestato discorso di Orban al Parlamento europeoNelle case gelate del Kursk: «Non accendiamo le stufe per paura di diventare dei bersagli»«Putin minacciò la guerra nucleare contro l'Ucraina»: le rivelazioni nel nuovo libro di Bob Woodward

(00:50) Lorenzo Cremonesi racconta i dettagli dell'accordo che ha portato alla liberazione, tra gli altri, del giornalista del «Wall Street Journal» Evan Gershkovich e del dissidente Vladimir Kara-Murza.(08:36) Marco Bonarrigo spiega che cosa è successo prima, durante e dopo l'incontro di boxe tra l'azzurra Angela Carini e l'algerina Ismane Khelif.(15:24) Maddalena Berbenni analizza il caso della donna di 33 anni uccisa con 4 coltellate in provincia di Bergamo.I link di corriere.it:Il caso di Angela Carini all'Olimpiade di Parigi: cosa è successo«Ismane Khelif è una donna; produce solo più ormoni, è come la sindrome dell'ovaio policistico»: l'intervista alla bioeticistaSharon Verzeni colpita con quattro coltellate, tre mortali. Non si è difesa

(02:06) Marta Serafini spiega perché il premier Benjamin Netanyahu ha deciso di colpire gli estremisti Houthi alla viglia della sua visita ufficiale negli Stati Uniti, dove il presidente uscente ha annunciato la rinuncia alla candidatura per le elezioni di novembre.(08:37) Monica Guerzoni racconta le vere ragioni delle tensioni continue tra i due vicepresidenti del Consiglio e leader di Forza Italia e Lega, all'indomani del diverso voto su Ursula von der Leyen. (15:19) Paolo Ottolina parla di quello che abbiamo imparato dalla crisi dei sistemi Microsoft.I link di corriere.it:Perché l'attacco degli Houthi a Tel Aviv è così importanteLega-Forza Italia, scontro sul voto in EuropaCrowdstrike, com'è potuto accadere il crash informatico globale?

Quel honneur de recevoir le pape du podcast français dans 4 Quarts d'Heure. On y souhaite des maladies aux gens, on se plaint encore et toujours des transports en commun et on parle de nos souvenirs de maladies gênantes, encore un bel épisode.Merci à Pøpe Music pour le montage de cet épisodeRappel important : chers 4 Quartdos, s'il vous plait, allez voter le 30 juin et le 7 juillet.

Weightlifter David Liti has had a long journey to his second Olympics. The 27-year-old will compete in the men's 102kg division in Paris as New Zealand's sole weightlifter at the Games. Liti is hoping to do better than his 5th place in Tokyo but believes he'll need to better his personal best of a 414kg total to be in the medals in August. Sports reporter Felicity Reid speaks to Lisa Owen.

Le parole del cardinale Parolin, che ha definito «sproporzionata» la reazione dopo l'attentato del 7 ottobre di Hamas (definendola «una carneficina») e la replica dell'ambasciata presso la Santa Sede analizzate da Gian Guido Vecchi. Massimo Rebotti spiega che cosa si nasconde dietro la contesa sul terzo mandato dei presidenti di Regione (dal minuto 6'17"). Nicola Saldutti racconta il durissimo scontro tra i discendenti dell'Avvocato (dal minuto 13'13").I link di corriere.it:Israele contro il Vaticano: «Parolin deplorevole su Gaza»Terzo mandato, il braccio di ferro tra Lega e FdI (per Zaia, e non solo)Margherita Agnelli «punta» la holding del vero potere degli Elkann: «Restituite tutta l'eredità»

Hann hefur flutt okkur fréttir frá víglínunni í Úkraínu, frá hamfarasvæðum í Marokkó og Tyrklandi og þegar hann byrjar að lýsa aðstæðum á íslensku, vopnaður hljóðnema merktum RÚV færast fjarlægir atburðir nær okkur. Við lítum í dag yfir farinn veg með Jóni Björgvinssyni, hann er frétta- og kvikmyndagerðarmaður, hefur lengi verið búsettur í Sviss og flytur okkur oft fréttir frá stríðs- og hamfarasvæðum. Á síðasta ári dvaldi hann meðal annars langdvölum í Úkraínu og flutti fréttir þaðan. Við heyrum svo nýárspistil frá Stefáni Gíslasyni, umhverfisstjórnunarfræðingi. Hann veltir því upp hvort tilefni sé til bjartsýni eða svartsýni í umhverfismálum í upphafi árs og fjallar sérstaklega um hræringar tengdar réttindum dýra og lífríkis.

Hann hefur flutt okkur fréttir frá víglínunni í Úkraínu, frá hamfarasvæðum í Marokkó og Tyrklandi og þegar hann byrjar að lýsa aðstæðum á íslensku, vopnaður hljóðnema merktum RÚV færast fjarlægir atburðir nær okkur. Við lítum í dag yfir farinn veg með Jóni Björgvinssyni, hann er frétta- og kvikmyndagerðarmaður, hefur lengi verið búsettur í Sviss og flytur okkur oft fréttir frá stríðs- og hamfarasvæðum. Á síðasta ári dvaldi hann meðal annars langdvölum í Úkraínu og flutti fréttir þaðan. Við heyrum svo nýárspistil frá Stefáni Gíslasyni, umhverfisstjórnunarfræðingi. Hann veltir því upp hvort tilefni sé til bjartsýni eða svartsýni í umhverfismálum í upphafi árs og fjallar sérstaklega um hræringar tengdar réttindum dýra og lífríkis.

Welcome to the Women of Golf Show! Tune in Tuesday 9:00 AM Eastern This week on the Women of Golf's “Season 10 Finale,” Cindy & Ted welcome special guest: Roberta Liti, LPGA Tour Player plus "Final thoughts for 2023." More on Roberta: Roberta didn't win on the Epson Tour this season but her strong ball-striking yielded consistent play. Liti led the tour in greens in regulation at 82.58 percent. A rookie on the Epson Tour in 2019, this is the first time Liti finished 8th spot in the top 10 to earn her LPGA card for 2024. Join LIVE Tuesdays 9:00 - 10:00AM Eastern http://www.blogtalkradio.com/womenofgolf Or listen on these platforms:  iTunes , Stitcher, Tunein, Castbox, TalkStreamLive & Spotify.

In questa puntata di Start parliamo del decreto attuativo della riforma fiscale in tema di contenzioso, dei contratti di lavoro dei rider e degli investimenti nelle residenze per anziani

In questa puntata di Start parliamo del decreto attuativo della riforma fiscale in tema di contenzioso, dei contratti di lavoro dei rider e degli investimenti nelle residenze per anziani

Liti nelle coppie in vacanza: ne parliamo al telefono con Carolina Traverso

In questa puntata di Start parliamo di come la delega fiscale modificherà il processo tributario, del nuovo decreto flussi per gli ingressi dei lavoratori immigrati e delle mosse con cui le università cercano di attrarre gli studenti, tra sconti sulle tasse e aiuti all'affitto

In questa puntata di Start parliamo di come la delega fiscale modificherà il processo tributario, del nuovo decreto flussi per gli ingressi dei lavoratori immigrati e delle mosse con cui le università cercano di attrarre gli studenti, tra sconti sulle tasse e aiuti all'affitto

Nesse episódio, Fernando Vilela e  Eduardo Rauen contam como o contato entre um pacientes à beira da exaustão e um médico nutrologista resultou na fundação da Liti Saúde, uma empresa que traz uma nova abordagem sobre a saúde. Eles comentam os desafios de unir pessoas com backgrounds técnicos opostos e complementares, ao mesmo tempo que buscam maneiras de transferir a reputação da medicina do offline para o meio digital. Confira a conversa conduzida pela Bel Gallera e saiba como eles chegaram a um negócio pautado pela ciência, individualização e humanização.  Convidados: Fernando VilelaCofundador da Liti Saúde, Vilela, foi um dos primeiros sócios do Rappi, onde liderou a expansão e atuou por três anos como Chief Marketing Officer, respondendo por todo o Marketing e Growth da operação brasileira. Ele também atua como professor convidado do MBA da PUC/RS na cadeira de Jornada e Experiência do Cliente, e de outras instituições. Um nome de destaque entre as principais lideranças de startups no Brasil.Perfil no Linkedin Eduardo RauenFundador da Liti Saúde, Rauen é graduado em medicina e tem uma longa trajetória na área da saúde, que marcou presença em hospitais como a Santa Casa de São Paulo e Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein. Hoje é diretor médico do Instituo Rauen, pós-graduado e especialista em nutrologia, membro efetivo da Associação Brasileira de Nutrologia (ABRAN), além de confundador da Liti Saúde.Perfil no Linkedin Destaques do episódio:00:04 Abertura00:50 Apresentação do Episódio: Liti Saúde01:17 Histórico de carreira e origem da Liti04:24 Jornada da exaustão ao empreendedorismo07:47 MVP: atendimento médico no digital10:23 Lidando com os primeiro desafios13:07 Soluções que não comprometem o desfecho clínico17:57 Modelo de negócio e os desafios de CAC e LTV21:09 Captura do interesse: Member Get Member e Mídia Paga23:58 Transferindo reputação do offline para o digital25:54 Ciência acima de tudo: a saúde como ponto indiscutível30:27 Métricas e monitoramento clínicos32:58 Escalando um tratamento de saúde individualizado36:08 A interação humana vs. escalabilidade39:14 O engajamento e a mudança de hábitos44:17 O futuro da Liti no Brasil e no mundo46:25 Encerramento Foi citado neste episódio:Conheça a Liti SaúdeExame Invest: Tudo sobre a Liti, startup de emagrecimento sem dietaForbes: Healthtech Liti levanta rodada seed de R$ 21 milhões Apresentação:Izabel GalleraPerfil no LinkedinSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mais um Urocast no ar! Hoje com a moderação do Dr. Alexandre Dingiullio e a convidada nutricionista Dra. Thalita Melo.

Nú þann 22. janúar gengur nýtt ár kanínunnar í garð samkvæmt hinu kínverska dagatali. Þau Anna og Magnús staldra því við og líta um öxl á ár tígursins sem reyndist nokkuð viðburðaríkt. Í hlaðvarpsþætti dagsins eru meðal annars rifjuð upp viðtöl við góða gesti og spiluð brot af því besta sem á boðstólum var.

Hlaðvarp Heimsgluggans er tvöfalt að þessu sinni, í fyrri hlutanum er viðtal sem Þórunn Elísabet Bogadóttir átti við Albert Jónsson og Boga Ágústsson um stöðuna í Úkraínu eftir innrás Rússa í febrúar. Fyrirætlun Pútíns Rússlandsforseta um að sigrast snarlega á her Úkraínu og skipta um stjórn í Kænugarði fóru algerlega út um þúfur, Úkraínumenn hafa varist af mikill hörku og nú virðist að mestu um kyrrstöðuhernað að ræða og að hvorki Rússar né Úkraínumenn hafi bolmagn til að sigrast á andstæðingnum. Síðari hluti Heimsgluggans var hefðbundnari og þar fór Bogi yfir ýmis mál sem voru efst á baugi í erlendum fréttum á árinu 2022.

Hlaðvarp Heimsgluggans er tvöfalt að þessu sinni, í fyrri hlutanum er viðtal sem Þórunn Elísabet Bogadóttir átti við Albert Jónsson og Boga Ágústsson um stöðuna í Úkraínu eftir innrás Rússa í febrúar. Fyrirætlun Pútíns Rússlandsforseta um að sigrast snarlega á her Úkraínu og skipta um stjórn í Kænugarði fóru algerlega út um þúfur, Úkraínumenn hafa varist af mikill hörku og nú virðist að mestu um kyrrstöðuhernað að ræða og að hvorki Rússar né Úkraínumenn hafi bolmagn til að sigrast á andstæðingnum. Síðari hluti Heimsgluggans var hefðbundnari og þar fór Bogi yfir ýmis mál sem voru efst á baugi í erlendum fréttum á árinu 2022.

This week's Espresso covers updates from Beat, Netpay, Yave, and more!Outline of this episode:[00:28] - Oxio integrates with Telcel in Mexico[00:56] - Mendel closes equity and debt financing round for $60M[01:30] - Beat ceases operations in Latin America[01:51] - Muncher secures a $27M Series B round[02:21] - Liti announces a $4M seed round[02:52] - FEMSA acquires Netpay[03:23] - Yave raises $7.5M in a funding round[03:45] - Agrolend closes $28M Series B round[04:11] - New Crossing Borders episode[04:31] - Event on The Future of WorkResources & people mentioned:Companies & Startups: Oxio, Telcel, Mendel, Beat, Muncher, Liti, FEMSA, Netpay, Yave, Agrolend, Laboratoria, Talanta.VCs, Accelerators, Institutions: Industry Ventures, Infinity Ventures, Victory Park Capital, Glisco Partners, Monashees, Canary, Grão, Norte, Eclipseon, Newtopia, The Fund, Latitud, Better Tomorrow Ventures, Metaprop, Lightrock.People: Mariana Costa.

En dehors de l'achat d'un nouveau compagnon, le secteur des animaux de compagnie est devenu un véritable business. Croquettes, services, innovations... La croissance du marché a doublé en quelques années. Ecoutez RTL Evenement avec Yves Calvi du 07 octobre 2022

L'Italia ha battuto il record negativo di nascite, continuiamo ad avere un tasso di occupazione femminile sotto la media europea e per una donna avere un figlio è sempre più incompatibile con la carriera. I programmi elettorali sono pieni di proposte per cambiare la situazione, ma c'è un problema: che cosa intendiamo per «famiglia»? Le interpretazioni divergono, esattamente allo stesso modo che per il diritto all'interruzione di gravidanza, come spiegano Alice Scaglioni e Chiara Lalli.Per altri approfondimenti:- Ungheria, prima dell'aborto è obbligatorio ascoltare il battito del feto https://bit.ly/3Lzq3dL- Chiara Appendino sull'aborto: “cara Giorgia Meloni, non prendere in giro le donne” https://bit.ly/3Uu4Rdq- Aborto, i numeri non tornano. Lalli e Montegiove: “Sulla legge 194 servono dati aperti” https://bit.ly/3LxhujC

David Liti has won silver in the men's over-109kg heavyweight class, finishing behind Pakistan's Muhammad Butt. His first lift of the day briefly taking him to the top spot. Liti couldn't quite match the gold he won on the Gold Coast four years ago. Reporter Bridget Tunnicliffe was at the event.

Amanda Boeira conversa com as sócias proprietárias da AMAVIH SHOES, Mari Bonatti e Liti Souto.

Welcome to the Women of Golf Show! Tune in Tuesday 9:00 AM Eastern Joining this week's show are special guests: Roberta Liti, Epson Tour Player + Kevin Stansfield, founder and Director of ActionCOACH Solent. More on Roberta & Kevin: Roberta is an Epson Tour player, her 2021 season in a Nutshell 18 events, nine cuts made. She recorded a season-best T6 result at the Casino Del Sol Classic. In 2020 she played 10 events with five cuts made. Season-best T5 result at the Symetra Classic. Finally in 2019 she played in 18 events with just six cuts made. Kevin is the founder and Director of ActionCOACH Solent. He has built this firm with the purpose of helping as many SME's in the local area to become as successful as they can for themselves and for the benefit of the economy as a whole. With a great team around him, they aim to coach, train, motivate and support local business owners and executives who want to take their businesses to the next level. Join LIVE Tuesdays 9:00 - 10:00AM Eastern http://www.blogtalkradio.com/womenofgolf Or listen on these platforms:  iTunes , Stitcher, Tunein, Castbox, TalkStreamLive & Spotify.